Re: [sig-policy] [Sig-policy] prop-073:Automatic allocation/assignmentof
> 2) IPv6 is a raging success and IPv4 addressing is relegated to history.
>
> 3) We have a hybrid network where IPv6 and IPv4 (perhaps with massive
> NAT) coexist for a long time.
>
> If either of 2) or 3) happens then the address space we allocated under
> this policy will have been warranted.
almost. to be warranted, it would have to be shown to be useful. and
many of us just don't see how giving operators something they did not
ask for as useful.
remember, it's not like you give me some ipv6 space and i sprinkle it on
my routers and servers. as the rirs have told the itu et alia, the
barrier to ipv6 deployment has not been lack of easy availability. it
is vendors and learning curve. it's not trivial to deploy, and getting
the space is not a significan part of the work.
i fear this is just another attempt at ipv6 'marketing'. if we want to
market it, we should say it is illegal, fattening, bad for your helath,
leads to use of harder ip addresses, and make it very hard to acquire.
:)
imiho, the big barriers to ipv6 deployment are vendors, education, and
senior engineer time. we're working the vendors, and there is progress.
and apnic and the other rirs continue to put serious effort into
education, thanks. dunno what to do about engineer time.
as far as policy goes, we can not set prices, the ec does that. but we
can make it easy to get what you want when you want it. do we have any
barriers in place we should seriously review?
randy