[arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2009-2: Depleted IPv4 reserves
pstewart at nexicomgroup.net
Tue Mar 24 15:49:19 EDT 2009
While we are not large by any stretch, we do have *well* over 100
network elements - our core and distribution are all dual stack today.
Our plan is that any new customer deployments (starting middle of this
year) would involve dual stack to the customer premise. Then we would
work our way back within a year of starting to run dual-stack at all
By putting it into our workflow of a standard deployment and then
focusing efforts on converting existing elements to dual stack, we feel
we can easily do this within a year.
With dual stack everywhere, then the "pressure is off" from our
perspective to avoid any sudden panic situations...
Just my two cents worth...
From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
Behalf Of Matthew Wilder
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 3:42 PM
To: Ron Cleven; ARIN PPML
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2009-2: Depleted IPv4 reserves
I will give you the benefit of the doubt here. In case there was the
slightest ambiguity with my comments, I will clarify my statements.
I did not at any point say that TELUS would be unable to transition to
IPv6, so hold back your shock for a moment. I suggested that TELUS
might be unable to transition certain services to IPv6 before IPv4
exhaust. At large organizations, there are too many inter-dependencies
to make everything happen at once. And I doubt there is an organization
out there with more than 100 network elements who plans to switch off
IPv4 before IPv4 address exhaust. I hope that doesn't trouble you too
Ron Cleven wrote:
> I have read over and over and over in this list that IPv6 is "the
solution" to all the IPv4 depletion problems. I have also seen tons of
posts that explicitly or implicitly assert that only irresponsible ISP's
will not be ready to go with IPv6 by the time IPv4 runs out. After all,
we have all known this day has been coming for the last decade. Yet,
you seem to saying that your large ISP who should be a leader in this
movement will be unable to make the transition in time. I'm shocked!
> Are there any other large ISP's monitoring this list who are the least
bit concerned about the transition, or is Telus the only one who can't
seem to figure this out? Perhaps one of the large ISP's who has
everything all figured out could share all their technical information
to put Telus' mind to rest?
Matthew Wilder wrote:
> Ron wrote:
>>Stephen's comments are spot on. The large ISP's are the very ones who
>>have both the resources and clout to make the IPv6 transition happen.
>>If they are unwilling or unable to do so, what does that say about the
>>viability of ever making that transition? Mr. Wilder doth protest too
> My explicit role in my organization is to ensure adequate IP
Addressing to support service growth and new service introduction. I
believe without a doubt that the only way I will be successful in that
mandate is to position IPv6 as the vehicle so that the IP Addresses are
> My organization is taking the steps necessary to get that transition
happening, so we are not unwilling. I can tell you that with certain
services, we might well be unable to transition before IPv4 exhaust
hits, but my focus is to transition the high growth services. I want to
make sure that the other services which may take longer to transition
have the IP Addresses available, as I am sure every other admin POC out
there is trying to ensure.
> I don't protest for the sake of demanding unfair privileges on the
behalf of large ISPs. I protest a policy that says everyone can have
their needs completely met except for one group, which can't even have a
reasonable fraction of their need met.
> Matthew Wilder
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
More information about the ARIN-PPML