ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: FW: I-D Action:draft-narten-ipv6-statement-00.txt

2007-11-13 23:28:15
On Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 11:30:42AM -0500, Thomas Narten wrote:
Hi.

A little more background/context that got me here.

My original thinking was to do something like what ICANN and the RIRs
have done, to bring awareness to the IPv4 situation and call for IPv6
deployment. I think the IETF can say a bit more about why, and the
threats to the internet architecture. (This came out of some
conversations I had at the recent ICANN meeting).

Maybe this could be an IAB statement. Maybe an IETF statement. I'm not
sure. But I think it would be useful to have an "IETF voice" also be
heard in the call for deployment. Especially since there are still
some going around saying "IPv6 is not needed." "IPv6 is still not
done, so don't deploy yet", etc. Does the IETF think that deploying
IPv6 is necessary and in the best interest of the Internet? If so,
reiterating that would be good.

Clarification is important here.  By "done", do you mean the
specifications (mostly agreed), the implementations (a point of
some controversy) or the migration path (even more controversial)?

I think though that it needs to be relatively short (which I probably
have already blown), and high-level, since it's really aimed at higher
level than your typical engineer. But the overal message needs to be
"think really hard about IPv4 exhaustion and what it means to your
business", "get serious about IPv6", and "it's done, so don't wait".

As I read the draft, a thought occurred to me that it's probably the
right level of detail for the Director of IT, Operations, or the
equivalent, but perhaps not for someone higher up in a management
chain.  Such persons may not be familiar with the CIDR terminology,
for example.

To find a good balance between "short" and also include a bit more
detail (especially on the implications of not seeing IPv6 deployed),
perhaps a short executive summary (which I didn't get into -00)
followed by a bit more detail (e.g., up to 3 pages or so) would do the
trick.

Thomas

_______________________________________________
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