Agreed. The statement from ARIN is recent and impacts us all. We've got our core v6 routing in place, but operationally, that's really the easy part. Modifying the tools such as billing, monitoring, management, tracking, and auditting are the slow link in the chain. The space is dwindling but that doesn't seem to be putting the transition pressure on if the services aren't there to use v6. Until more transit providers support it, the reasoning for smaller provider to transition is limited.
Eric Krichbaum, PhD Director Network Engineering, Citynet -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steven M. Bellovin Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2007 11:31 AM To: Randy Bush Cc: Martin Hannigan; nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted On Sat, 26 May 2007 00:39:19 -0400 Randy Bush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > you have something new and interesting about ipv6? if so, did you > submit? > Given the ARIN statement, I think it's time for more discussion of v6 migration, transition, and operations issues. No, I'm not volunteering; I'm not running a v6 network. I suspect that Martin is right -- the program committee should be proactive on this topic and seek out presenters. --Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
