[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2019-19: Require IPv6 Before Receiving Section 8 IPv4 Transfers

Adam Thompson athompson at merlin.mb.ca
Fri Nov 15 12:41:46 EST 2019

> Reminds me of ISDN : I Still Don't Need. Look around you and tell me where
> you see ISDN. There is still plenty of POTS, and plenty of aDSL over POTS,
> not over ISDN.

I beg your pardon???

BRIs are an utter market failure, for (unusually) mostly technical reasons.  The economic reasons were driven by the technical reason - to wit, installing BRI shelves into a Nortel DMS-100 provided 16 (iirc) BRIs in a space that could otherwise supply ~200 POTS lines.  There's only so much room in a CO, there's only so many shelves in only so many cabinets, so BRIs wound up being priced sky-high, at around 16/200 the price of a POTS line.

PRIs, however, are still alive and doing VERY well, despite the advent of VoIP which promises to replace them.  In many rural markets, PRIs are the only land-line option for "high-speed" data, and companies are *still* doing silly-but-needful things like bonding 16 PRIs together in locations where they can't feasibly run microwave radio.

> The only thing that IPv6 could do for me is to waste my resources configuring it.

...or arguing about it, although admittedly I'm doing the same right now.

> It's been 20 years, and you need to tell me that I need to dual-stack and
> wait another 20 years ?
> You want me to go tell my investors that I need money to spend on an
> upgrade that provides ZERO ROI for at least 10 years ?

No.  The proposed policy does not tell you to upgrade everything and deploy IPv6 everywhere.  You're not even constructing a straw-man argument, your argument appears to be entirely fallacious (unless I've forgotten something vital about the proposal?).

> If such policy comes to pass, it will be challenged. ARIN has no business
> forcing me to spend time to configure IPv6 in order for me to administer
> IPv4 resources.
> This proposal is flawed. Forcing people to register IPv6 prefixes so the
> IPv6 deployment figures look better. It's a lie.
> It's a lie to make some numbers look good.

It's not a lie at all.  Yes, it will produce somewhat artificial results if you use it to measure penetration or deployment, which we don't because it's already inflated.  Yes, we'll have to measure real deployment using other tools - just like we do now.
How do you measure how many adults in the western world today still have most of their teeth because of fluoridation?  Did any of us *want* to brush our teeth as kids?
The policy is for your own good, and mine, and the good of entities who aren't even members yet, and the good of entities in other regions.
IF that means ARIN members are being treated like children, it's because so many of them have behaved that way.  And here we get into geopolitics again, which is rather out-of-scope for PPML.

Adam Thompson
Consultant, Infrastructure Services
100 - 135 Innovation Drive
Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8
(204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only)
athompson at merlin.mb.ca

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list