[arin-ppml] 125

[Vaughn Thurman - Swift Systems Inc]

> Honestly, the problem is implementation readiness and pricing. Vendors
have often pushed the better IPv6 stacks to their newer gear only, pushing
the
> price of deploying into a proper IPv6 layout higher. In addition, not all
problems have been resolved by most/all vendors.

> So the policy proposal is to strong arm people into spending money on more
expensive crap hardware solutions to deploy something that is far inferior
to
>  what they currently have instead of letting them wait until vendors can
work the bugs out and market pricing can come down to a reasonable level.


Jack, I think you made my point here much more succinctly, and a bit less
controversially than I did.

Despite the schoolyard responses, there is a simple point here.  It is NOT
the business of ARIN to be dictating who spends what where, and prop 125
does that.  It's simply out of scope.  We don't need to encourage IPv6, it
is as inevitable as the morning sun tomorrow!

I feel like we are debating a policy designed to get the sun to rise faster
and everyone will need to buy stock in "SunComeUpCo" now or else.