[arin-ppml] Is Emergency action warranted for Policy Proposal 123: Reserved Pool for Critical Infrastructure?

[Leo Bicknell]

In a message written on Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 03:05:23PM -0500, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
> Either v6 adoption is, or isn't, a manageable cost, and 123 offers a 
> temporal tool, re-usable v4 blocks, that may move the cost of v6 
> adoption off of the applicant-operator's debit finance and onto its 
> revenue finance books.

I highly doubt the cost of IPv6 to a new gTLD are significant.

The folks who have come forward with significant costs to deploy
IPv6 are folks with a huge legacy equipment provider.  DSLAMs that
must be forklifted.  10 million CPE's that must be swapped.

If you're setting up some servers in a colo to serve a TLD any
equipment you're likely to select already supports it.  Sure there
is a small amount of staff time to configure it, and perhaps depending
on your situation, things like additional RIR fees, but they are
all very small dollars.

If the cost of doing IPv6 is too much for a new gTLD operator than
I would say ICANN awared the gTLD to someone who is not competent
to run it.  However, there's a reason I stay out of that part of the
Internet process...

-- 
       Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 826 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20101222/35806926/attachment.sig>