[arin-ppml] An article of interest to the community....

Chris Engel cengel at conxeo.com
Thu Sep 1 11:16:45 EDT 2011

> >
> Absolutely. I just think that Chris underestimates what it is going to cost him
> to try and prolong the life of IPv4 and that as he begins to realize those costs,
> IPv6 will become radically more attractive in terms of cost/benefit ratio.
> Unfortunately, he probably will not realize this until he has wasted relatively
> vast sums of money on expensive equipment to try and keep IPv4 on life
> support when that money would have been better spent moving towards
> IPv6.
> Such is the short-term thinking of a market.


Every usage case will be different, but for the record, I can't fathom what those costs would be in our case. We don't actually need more public IPv4 address then we currently have and even if we did due to growth I can't imagine it would be likely to be more then low double digits. We already, for purposes that have nothing to do with address conservation, make pretty extensive use of technologies that allow for sharing of public address space (NAT/PAT, Load Balancing, Host-Headers, etc) and would want to preserve similar functionality even under unlimited IP address availability.

Private IPv4 address space is free and already works with all our existing hardware/software and applications. We don't make use of Peer to Peer applications as decentralized management of technology doesn't make sense for our business model. In other words, even if there was some Peer to Peer application which we found useful we would want to route all of our usage of it through some centralized gateway on our end so that we can uniformly apply policy and logging one place. So we would WANT to have ALG's in place for any Peer to Peer apps we might use, REGARDLESS of the availability public addresses.

So I'm really struggling to see what sort of costs remaining on IPv4 and avoiding IPv6 would have for the foreseeable future? The only thing I can think of is not being accessible to IPv6 only traffic. Quite frankly I can't see anyone in the next decade (if ever) who got assigned an IPv6 only address NOT setting up the capability to tunnel or proxy onto the V4 network. So where is the loss, even there? What I see is alot of FUD being sold about the need to be on the IPv6 train now. That's SOP for vendors trying to sell new technology solutions. I think there are industries or verticals that it probably does make sense to be on the IPv6 bandwagon but for the rest of us, not so much. It's all cost and very little, if any, gain.

About the only thing I would want IPv6 for these days is my own private playground....to get myself and our staff a little more experience on it, in case it does gain momentum......but quite frankly we're all too busy doing productive work that needs to be done today..to spare the time for that sort of thing. YMMV.

Chris Engel

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list