ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Let's look at it from an IETF oldie's perspective... Re: IPv4Outage Planned for IETF 71 Plenary

2007-12-19 12:02:56
On the contrary, from the perspective of the ISPs, slamming their customers 
behind a NAT is a perfectly acceptable solution.
 
The oldie perspective of 'take it or leave it' is not going to work here. I 
have gamed the dynamics of IPv4 exhaustion quite extensively and the mere fact 
that there are no more IPv4 addresses left to be allocated does not provide the 
forcing function people imagine.
 
IPv4 is a party with a limited number of tickets. The number of tickets is much 
larger than the number of tickets for the superbowl but the same market 
dynamics apply. Folk who have tickets have no need of a bigger stadium. In fact 
they are perfectly OK with the situation since their ticket now has a resale 
value.
 
The approach this is predicated on is akin to telling superbowl fans without a 
ticket to 
 
1) Build a stadium
2) Persuade the teams to play in the (empty) new stadium rather than the old 
one that is full.
 
In the real world superbowl fans buy a ticket from a scalper instead.
 
The situation is not hopeless, far from it. There are approaches to managing 
the transition that will work. Telling the word that IPv6 is the only game in 
town and expecting them to bow to this wisdom is not going to work.
 
We have to have an economic model for this transition.
 
 
 
________________________________

From: Bob Braden [mailto:braden(_at_)ISI(_dot_)EDU]
Sent: Wed 19/12/2007 1:11 PM
To: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Let's look at it from an IETF oldie's perspective... Re: IPv4Outage 
Planned for IETF 71 Plenary




Here is my understanding:

1.  The shortage of IPv4 addresses will increasingly cripple the
        communication effectiveness of the Internet, either directly
        or indirectly through ubiqitous NATting.

2.  As a replacement for IPv4, IPv6 is the only game in town.  We did it.

3.  Unless we want the ITU to eat our dogfood, the IETF needs to get
        serious about discovering and solving the remaining technical
        problems implicit in IPv6 deployment.

4.  In recent years, a large fraction of IETF activity has moved from
        our original and core concern, the network and transport
        layers, to (more profitable?) issues at the application layer
        and layer 2.5.  It is time to take the network layer seriously
        again.

5.  The recent messages containing reasoned calls for advance planning
        and coordination of an IPv6 connectathon are all important and
        need to be heeded.

6.  There is a social engineering as well as a technical engineering
        problem here.

7.  This discussion has already been useful.

Bob Braden




_______________________________________________
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