[arin-ppml] IPv4 Depletion as an ARIN policy concern

[Lee Howard]

----- Original Message ----
> From: William Herrin <bill at herrin.us>
> To: Lee Howard <spiffnolee at yahoo.com>
> Cc: "arin-ppml at arin.net" <arin-ppml at arin.net>
> Sent: Sun, November 1, 2009 1:47:13 PM
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] IPv4 Depletion as an ARIN policy concern
> 
> On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 10:27 AM, Lee Howard wrote:
> >> Not possible. Not even in 3 years.
> >
> > I'd like to dig into that denial some more, preferably without argument
> > by toilet analogy. :-)
> > Your objections, as I recall (maybe you could list them again, so we
> > can discuss what needs to happen on each one):
> > 1.  IPv6 transit is unreliable
> > 2.  An dual-stacked client with IPv4-only connectivity may try IPv6
> > first, and wait for timeout before successfully using IPv6.
> 
> Lee,
> 
> I think if I abstract my complaint it'll make a little more sense:
> 
> 1. Nothing inherent to IPv6's design acts to make it more reliable than IPv4.
> 2. Given two systems whose theoretical reliability is identical, the
> practical difference in reliability will tend to be a function of the
> relative experience and investment in each.
> 3. The investment in and experience with IPv6 is paltry compared to
> the investment in IPv4 and the gap is widening, not closing.
> 4. From 1-3, I expect (and in fact observe) that IPv6's standard of
> reliability in virtually all of its aspects is significantly behind
> IPv4.
> 5. Due to a poor architectural decision by the IETF (IPv6 first, fall
> back to IPv4), I can't make effective use of IPv6 *at all* unless I
> deliberately ignore #4 and choose to accept degraded functionality on
> my system.
> 
> 
> Arguably the massive deployment of NAT necessary to extend IPv4 will
> alter point #1, with the result propagating through the logic chain.

Yes, I make that argument.

> If not for #5, IPv6 would have a much easier time getting past the
> "worthy enough to deploy" barrier. 

I disagree with you.  I think there's a larger population who have been
hearing about IPv6 for so long that they've decided it will never
happen (or who are otherwise ignorant of IPv6), and the only way to
convince them that networks will use IPv6 is if networks use IPv6.

Otherwise, nobody will know if IPv6 is working until IPv4 
connectivity is shut off, which is a little late to find out.

> Of course, that pendulum could swing the other way too. When whatever
> happens post-depletion settles out into a routine, the risk-cost of
> continuing with only IPv4 could go way down.

It sounds like you've done your research and built your contingency
plans.  Maybe you've only done engineering, and not systems work.
If everyone waits until we achieve a steady state, then it will take
years to achieve a stable, reliable Internet.

Lee