[arin-ppml] Change of Use and ARIN (was: Re: AFRINIC And The Stability Of The Internet Number Registry System)

[Owen DeLong]

>> 
>> Electric cars have been around for a century.  But claiming that they
>> failed for 80 years means they are failing now is idiotic because
>> they aren't failing now.
> 
> Name and shame, dual stack and wait (for all stacks to be dual stacked) is an utter failure because it failed for 20 years to help in any meaningful way the issues the internet is experiencing and continues to experience right here and right now. And yes it was predictable because its success depended not only on illogical expectations of human nature, but also in the technical requirement of matching IPv4 addresses which were known at the time would not be available.

Revisionist history…

Ironically, a timely move to dual stack would have meant that the IPv4 addresses needed for it were available, which would have allowed a smooth transition to v6 with new sites being deployed v6-only and old sites deprecating v4 at their leisure.

Foot-dragging by those who saw no incentive to be community minded indeed took us beyond the date where this was feasible and transition mechanism hacks are the inevitable and inferior result of that foot dragging.

> However, the longer this drags on the greater the odds that things we dont want will happen and irrevocably alter the landscape in ways we would not have wanted.

Or eventually, people will see something they want that is enabled by restoring the end-to-end model and that will drive demand for IPv6 and things we do want will happen.

> Worse for your analogy, electric car success can be wholly attributed to both new technology and manufacturers finally making cars that people actually wanted, and not just for the smug value.

OK, so what new technology can be deployed that will drive adoption of a new addressing scheme that doesn’t suffer from the shortages built in to IPv4?

> If I havent gotten the point across that this is what IPv6 actually needs to be successful any time soon, there is little reason for continuing this conversation.

You’ve done a great job of pointing out everything you think is wrong… You’ve done nothing to offer any positive solutions to any of the problems raised for either protocol.

> The goal should not be eventual IPv6 adoption by attrition. The goal should be meaningful solutions to actual issues, now and real soon. Hopefully sustainable ones, but the here and now means something to people living in it.

IPv6 adoption whether by attrition or other means is a solution to the actual issue of address shortage. Ideally, getting others to recognize this and move forward will provide a sustainable solution sooner rather than later, but the lengths people will go to in order to avoid change are impressive.

Owen