Joe Maimon wrote:<br>
>>Lee Dilkie wrote:<br>
>><br>>> One good way for organizations like ARIN to help with dual stack is to<br>
>> simply give out v6 addresses, free, to all current v4 address holders<br>
>><br>
>Which they do for the most part. To date the only significant complaints<br>
>I have seen have been regarding those who arent IPv4 holders or with the<br>
>single prefix policy.<br><br>As a "small" legacy IPv4 holder, I can attest that one of the main reasons I haven't rolled out IPv6 <br>is mostly because I wasn't offered an IPv6 equivalent to the IPv4 I hold. <br>
<br>I know of other similar small legacy IPv4 holders who are in the exact came boat. <br><br>I did see where I could pay $$ to register and then continuously pay $$ for it each year...<br>But I'll be fairly honest, what would be in it for me? Yes, it's a self-centered attitude, I acknowledge that, however<br>
businesses and organizations on the whole need some reason, aside from the "we'd all like you to",<br>or "this is the latest technology, trust me you HAVE to have it". For a lot of businesses and organizations<br>
neither of those reasons will get them to change. If what I have meets my needs, and there aren't any IPv6 features <br>or services that I "have-to-have" along with the additional cost to even get started, what's the motivation?<br>
(even IF it is free, I still have to incur additional time and labor to manage the dual stacks, but I'd be at least <br>willing and able to at least "start" moving if I had one in hand....)<br><br>For example, at least to some degree, Windows XP to Windows Vista adoption numbers support this type of thought process.<br>
What's going to "force" people to move from XP is Microsoft stopping support for it, (that's what happened with Win98) and/or there being <br>some device or application that breaks the old, or requires the newer OS (USB devices for Windows 98 to Windows XP for example). <br>
<br>However, in the IPv4 case, you're not going to get "support dropped" for it, and to date there isn't any IPv6 "killer-app" / device.<br>People continue to cleverly and creatively develop apps for and get more and more mileage out of IPv4... <br>
( personally I feel that NAT came out of this "clever-creative-stretch-the-spec" thought process. )<br><br>So I agree with Lee that without a "carrot" of "You have an IPv4 allocation, here's your equivalent IPv6 allocation, no questions asked", <br>
you're going to have to either wait for no address availability or some IPv6 "killer-app" to see folks start to move in any significant number.<br> And given how clever folks are, I'm not sure how much of a forcing function 0 IPv4 addresses is going to be yet...<br>
<br>No vendor is going to "drop" IPv4 support... not if they want to stay
in business. <br>Every piece of equipment I have supports a IPv6 and IPv4
stack...and has for years, so it's not because I couldn't do it...<br><br><br>Earl Baugh<br>