From: michael(_dot_)dillon(_at_)bt(_dot_)com
[mailto:michael(_dot_)dillon(_at_)bt(_dot_)com]
I still believe that the time is right for an IETF WG to define SOHO
gateway requirements for IPv6 networks because IPv4 wind-down will
cause
more people to take a serious look at how and why to deploy IPv6. One
single good idea in a SOHO gateway document could be enough to tip the
scales and make a business case for IPv6 services.
You might be surprised to find how many network and IT managers think we
already ran out of IPv4 addresses years ago, and how many more never thought
about it at all.
IT at most any non-technology company is still not seen as a revenue
generating division and I doubt very little short of losing internet
connectivity will be motivator enough to start thinking about the switch to
IPv6. To me the problem with using "running out of IPv4 addresses" as a
motivator is that what does that really mean? Is the internet going to stop
working? Would anyone notice if not for the media? Why should an
established company care if their upstart competitor now has to wait 3 years
to get an internet presence? How is it going to break what people have
that's currently working - that's what most people don't know. And being
the selfish species that we are, that's why most people don't care.
I think the thing that would help IPv6 the most would be the setting of a
hard date when no new IPv4 addresses would be issued. This would make it
real for everyone and ignite the IPv6/IPv4 gateway market (I think). Not to
mention we'd never have to have another debate over when IPv4 was going to
run out which might be benefit enough in itself ;)
nick
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf