RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 Depletion and Deployment of IPv6
I don't think my comment was well understood today in the session, so I drafted how I think the community resolution should look. See below. English nits should be reviewed, but the main idea is that we start with a short kind of intro of the situation (those points from the original 5 that are generic), staying focus, keeping it short, but at the same time help each "kind of reader" to identify what is the paragraph that is *more* relevant to him. I also added a specific action for policy makers/regulators and one for users. I hope that, as very few people (in the list and session) has provided input on this, we are allowed to participate in the final drafting of the document. Not being a big group is possible to do it, as otherwise, will not really be a community resolution. Regards, Jordi At current allocation rates, the remaining pool of unallocated IPv4 address space is likely to be allocated within the next two to four years. Although the Internet will continue to function as normal after this point, this event will have a significant influence on future network operations as well as IP address management and allocation policies. Therefore we recognise that the widespread deployment of IPv6 will be essential to sustain future growth of the Internet. We recognise that the responsibility for creating policies related to the management of critical Internet resources in the RIPE NCC service region rests with the RIPE community and the proven success of the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP). In recognition of this responsibility, we commit to continue development of effective policies for the responsible management of IPv4 and IPv6 address space. We agree that this situation requires a committed effort from network operators, ISPs and the RIPE community. We urge that the widespread deployment of IPv6 be made a high priority. In addition to that, other sectors must take their own measures in order to success on this mission: 1) Network operators and Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are called to the urgent deployment of IPv6 across their networks as soon as possible. This deployment must include providing IPv6 access to End Users and ensuring services are accessible by IPv6. 2) Vendors (hardware and software) are called to the urgent support of IPv6 support in their products, to make it possible for network operators and Internet Service Providers to provide these services. 3) Regulators and policy makers are called to make sure the relevance of the IPv6 support is considered in all their decisions, including as an immediate condition for public procurements. 4) Users must ensure, when acquiring new services, hardware or software, that it supports IPv6 (natively or by means of transition mechanisms). ********************************************** The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org Bye 6Bone. Hi, IPv6 ! http://www.ipv6day.org This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.
1) Network operators and Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are called to the urgent deployment of IPv6 across their networks as soon as possible. This deployment must include providing IPv6 access to End Users and ensuring services are accessible by IPv6.
I would like to see this text explicitly mention both "deployment of IPv6 network access" and "deployment of IPv6 transitional measures". Otherwise, decisionmakers will think that it is sufficient to offer an IPv6 version of their IPv4 access product. That is not too hard to do, but it doesn't deliver what most customers want, which is access to the whole Internet, IPv4 and IPv6. That is where deployment of transitional measures become important, and I would argue, that they are more important right now than deploying IPv6 access services because the transitional measures solve problems that are happening right now with native IPv6 in OS/X and Vista. --Michael Dillon
Fully agree, I actually said it last week in one of my previous emails on this ... So probably something like: 1) Network operators and Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are called to the urgent deployment of IPv6 and transitional measures across their networks as soon as possible. This deployment must include providing IPv6 access to End Users and ensuring services are accessible by IPv6. Regards, Jordi
De: <michael.dillon@bt.com> Responder a: <address-policy-wg-admin@ripe.net> Fecha: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 11:07:40 +0100 Para: <address-policy-wg@ripe.net>, <ipv6-wg@ripe.net> Conversación: [ipv6-wg] RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 Depletion and Deployment of IPv6 Asunto: [address-policy-wg] RE: [ipv6-wg] RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 Depletion and Deployment of IPv6
1) Network operators and Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are called to the urgent deployment of IPv6 across their networks as soon as possible. This deployment must include providing IPv6 access to End Users and ensuring services are accessible by IPv6.
I would like to see this text explicitly mention both "deployment of IPv6 network access" and "deployment of IPv6 transitional measures". Otherwise, decisionmakers will think that it is sufficient to offer an IPv6 version of their IPv4 access product. That is not too hard to do, but it doesn't deliver what most customers want, which is access to the whole Internet, IPv4 and IPv6. That is where deployment of transitional measures become important, and I would argue, that they are more important right now than deploying IPv6 access services because the transitional measures solve problems that are happening right now with native IPv6 in OS/X and Vista.
--Michael Dillon
********************************************** The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org Bye 6Bone. Hi, IPv6 ! http://www.ipv6day.org This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.
Hi Michael, Op 25-okt-2007, om 12:07 heeft <michael.dillon@bt.com> <michael.dillon@bt.com> het volgende geschreven:
1) Network operators and Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are called to the urgent deployment of IPv6 across their networks as soon as possible. This deployment must include providing IPv6 access to End Users and ensuring services are accessible by IPv6.
I would like to see this text explicitly mention both "deployment of IPv6 network access" and "deployment of IPv6 transitional measures". Otherwise, decisionmakers will think that it is sufficient to offer an IPv6 version of their IPv4 access product. That is not too hard to do, but it doesn't deliver what most customers want, which is access to the whole Internet, IPv4 and IPv6. That is where deployment of transitional measures become important, and I would argue, that they are more important right now than deploying IPv6 access services because the transitional measures solve problems that are happening right now with native IPv6 in OS/X and Vista.
--Michael Dillon
Thank you for your suggestion. I will include it in the discussion later in the iPv6 working group session. It might be too detailed for the intended audience though. We are targeting decision makers with this text. Thanks for your input! Sander
participants (3)
-
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
-
michael.dillon@bt.com
-
Sander Steffann