The problem is that until IPv6 has critical mass it is much better to be on
IPv4 than IPv6.
If there are any grad students reading the list take a look at the game theory
literature and apply it to the transition. Assume that it's a rat-choice world
and that each actor follows their best interest.
An actor can be in one of several states:
Unconnected
IPv4 connected with own address
IPv4-NAT connected with NAT address
IPv4/IPv6 connected Dual stack
IPv4-NAT/IPv6 connected Dual stack
IPv6 connected
There are certain costs associated with the various transitions. The benefit of
being in the IPv4 or IPv6 network is proportional to the size of the networks.
I don't have time to run full simulation runs but my preliminary trials suggest
that IPv6 is not relevant to the IPv4 exhaustion issue.
The reason is that the participants are all going to cluster into IPv4/IPv6 or
IPv4-NAT/IPv6, there is no incentive I can see to transition to the pure IPv6
state and release the IPv4 addresses.
Unless you assume that there is a very considerable value to IPv4 over IPv4-NAT
all that happens during address exhaustion is that larger and larger
proportions of the net disappear behind NATs. In effect you end up with the two
speed Internet we want to avoid.
Rather than fight the dynamics of a market with a billion participants I
believe that we should embrace them and remember that taking IPv4 to end of
life is not exactly an unacceptable outcome. The key is to channel people into
IPv4-NAT/IPv6 rather than IPv4-NAT.
The way that I would go about this is to introduce a gold standard for next
generation gateways that provide other features that the consumer is likely to
consider desirable. Like being maintenance free, working without the complaints
and setup time that current devices require.
-----Original Message-----
From: michael(_dot_)dillon(_at_)bt(_dot_)com
[mailto:michael(_dot_)dillon(_at_)bt(_dot_)com]
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 6:26 AM
To: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: RE: NATs as firewalls
Recovering three-quarters of an /8 delays the moment of
truth by less
than a month. Work hard and you might gain a year or even more, but
would that year really make a difference?
And that is why there will never be a market for IPv4
addresses. Any trading activity can only ever buy a few
months of time for the buyer.
After that, they have to migrate to IPv6 like everyone else.
Eventually, some companies will shut down IPv4 infrastructure
and release IPv4 addresses, but that is only going to happen
once IPv6 is well and truly proven in their network. In order
to shut off a network, 100% of the traffic has to be shifted
to a replacement infrastructure. How many of you know of X.25
networks still in operation?
--Michael Dillon
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf