Hi,

>> ... when the support people for a fairly well-established telco
>> haven't even heard of IPv6, it's hard to believe that it's going
>> to be available anytime soon.
>> [multiple people essentially reporting the same]
>> At this point in time $ISP has no immediate plans for implementation.
> I would say it's about time reality finally settles in.

My reality is that I switched to an ISP who openly announced native IPv6
support in their offering in 2007. Up and running since then, and when I
had trouble setting up the IPCP+IP6CP in the same PPP channel in IOS, I
wrote them an email on a Saturday, and got a config snippet back an hour
later, as part of their standard customer service. That ISP operates
nation-wide and uses IPv6 as a marketing instrument to get techies to
subscribe. For a price of converted 15 USD per month. That's in Germany
though. Apparently, realities differ depending on where you are.

Greetings,

Stefan Winter

>
>> Keith Moore wrote:
>> Meanwhile, 6to4 continues to work just fine for me.
>> So please explain again why it isn't premature to
>> discourage a valuable transition mechanism?
> On that one I agree with Keith; where's the rush? Although imperfect,
> 6to4 was an obvious path and its demise would be the failure of the
> IETF, following a long list of things that have been killed prematurely.
>
>
>> Ned wrote:
>> Anyone who doesn't believe we have a major marketing
>> problem here isn't paying attention.
> Hmm that is a point of view. You think you have a solution (IPv6) to
> what you perceive to be a problem (shortage of IPv4 addresses).
>
> However, some ISPs (and some other companies) do not consider it a
> problem, but a blessing. What the IPv4 shortage does is that it prevents
> new large players to enter the field, while allowing existing players to
> continue to do business as usual.
>
> As the shortage as been predicted for a decade, some (not all) have
> stockpiled addresses and are now reaping the benefits. In business, this
> situation is worth solid gold: it's called a monopoly. I'm fat and
> happy, and I want it to continue. In this case, it's even better:
> companies who benefit from it can argue that they are not the ones who
> created the monopoly, it was a built-in limitation of the system as
> created.
>
> Some may not like the parallel, but we have failed the IPv6 migration
> the same way we have failed the war on drugs. A while ago, there was
> this thing called the Tier-1 cartel. As originally designed, a very
> elusive club, with almost no way in and absolutely no tears when a
> member gets de-peered.
>
> Some have said that the cartel has failed as a system (due to a large
> number of multilateral peering agreements and other factors). But now
> what we have is a much larger number of largely unorganized but sharing
> the same goals entities: those who already have IPv4 addresses. It's
> even worse.
>
> When a resource becomes scare or limited, the big picture is not how
> much of it is available, or how much it costs. The big picture is how
> much of the market one does control. Now we are in the situation where
> everyone and their sister own a piece of the pie, and as long as the
> price of the pie keeps going up, they're going to cling to it.
>
>  
> On top of the marketing problem you mentioned, you have a bigger one:
> there are many, many organizations out there that, even if you paid them
> to deploy IPv6, would not. Because IPv6 is a territorial threat to them.
>
> While the new or wannabe players would like the extra address space, the
> sad truth is that the already establish players don't like newly open
> spaces and prefer the territory control that comes with owning a piece
> of a limited land space.
>
> Michel.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


-- 
Stefan WINTER
Ingenieur de Recherche
Fondation RESTENA - Réseau Téléinformatique de l'Education Nationale et de la 
Recherche
6, rue Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi
L-1359 Luxembourg

Tel: +352 424409 1
Fax: +352 422473


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Reply via email to