Hi BCOP people, As I promised on Monday during the BCOP session at RIPE 72 I would prepare a community statement that reflect the wise words that our RIPE Chair, Hand Petter Holen, made at the opening ceremony. I discussed this with Hans Petter because I don't want to take someone else's words without permission. He was ok with using his words as the starting point and form a community statement in BCOP based on that. For reference here is the original transcript taken from https://ripe72.ripe.net/archives/steno/5/:
Now when that is said, it's always also important to realise that with IPv4 space, the legacy old IP addresses, there isn't anything left; we have a small reserve so new members can get a /22, as we call it, around a thousand addresses, so they can start up a business. But this is not things you can build your future on. The only way to survive in the future is to implement v6 from the start, then you can get some v4 addresses so you can boot strap and still be connected to the legacy Internet, but it is possible today to build v6 networks and have transition mechanisms to v4 and that is the only sustainable way going forward.
As my intention is both making a clear statement about the Best Current Operational Practice on using the last remaining IPv4 addresses, and to show confirmation as a community that we stand behind the statement from our RIPE chair I have stayed as close to this original as possible. I have reorganised it a bit to make it easier to read, and I propose that we bring the following text to the floor on Friday: ------------- It is important to realise that there isn't any IPv4 space left; the RIPE NCC has a small reserve so new members can get a /22 so they can start up a business, to bootstrap and to communicate with the legacy Internet. But this is not something anybody can build their future on. The only way to survive in the future is to implement IPv6 from the start. It is possible to build IPv6 networks today and have transition mechanisms to IPv4, and that is the only sustainable way forward. ------------- If this task force agrees on a text I will present it on Friday during the closing plenary and ask the community as a whole to express their support. Please let me know if you think the proposed text is indeed a BCOP and that it represents the words from Hans Petter correctly. Cheers, Sander
On 25/05/16 16:56, Sander Steffann wrote:
------------- It is important to realise that there isn't any IPv4 space left; the RIPE NCC has a small reserve so new members can get a /22 so they can start up a business, to bootstrap and to communicate with the legacy Internet. But this is not something anybody can build their future on. The only way to survive in the future is to implement IPv6 from the start. It is possible to build IPv6 networks today and have transition mechanisms to IPv4, and that is the only sustainable way forward. -------------
I like it. cheers, Jan
Me, too. -- Sebastian Becker sb@lab.dtag.de
Am 25.05.2016 um 17:42 schrieb Jan Zorz <jan@go6.si>:
On 25/05/16 16:56, Sander Steffann wrote:
------------- It is important to realise that there isn't any IPv4 space left; the RIPE NCC has a small reserve so new members can get a /22 so they can start up a business, to bootstrap and to communicate with the legacy Internet. But this is not something anybody can build their future on. The only way to survive in the future is to implement IPv6 from the start. It is possible to build IPv6 networks today and have transition mechanisms to IPv4, and that is the only sustainable way forward. -------------
I like it.
cheers, Jan
Hi,
Me, too.
Ok... A few statements of support, no objections. As I have to submit the slides on time for bringing this to the closing plenary tomorrow I ask the chairs to please judge on consensus :) Cheers! Sander
On 26/05/16 15:59, Sander Steffann wrote:
Hi,
Me, too.
Ok... A few statements of support, no objections. As I have to submit the slides on time for bringing this to the closing plenary tomorrow I ask the chairs to please judge on consensus :)--
Well, I see no objections and my view is that text is good, so I would suggest you present it at the closing plenary. Let's also wait for Benno's input, I saw him running around and I'll mention him to express his opinion if I see him shortly. Cheers, Jan
Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> writes:
Now when that is said, it's always also important to realise that with IPv4 space, the legacy old IP addresses, there isn't anything left; we have a small reserve so new members can get a /22, as we call it, around a thousand addresses, so they can start up a business. But this is not things you can build your future on. The only way to survive in the future is to implement v6 from the start, then you can get some v4 addresses so you can boot strap and still be connected to the legacy Internet, but it is possible today to build v6 networks and have transition mechanisms to v4 and that is the only sustainable way going forward.
It would be particularly valuable to have such a clear statement. For example, I have tried with limited success to get the Scottish government to require IPv6 deployment as a condition of providing grants to rural broadband projects. It is very difficult to get them to understand that this is very important for new networks, not just nice to have or something of interest to technical enthusiasts. I think a reasonably authoritative statement from the RIPE members would go some way towards convincing them. Best wishes, -w
+1 from me. Text like this is very straight forward and simple for all to understand the pressing need. Like William says below here I'd support the text fully! Mick Mick O'Donovan | Network Engineer | BT Ireland | Website: http://www.btireland.net Looking Glass: http://lg.as2110.net Peering Record: http://as2110.peeringdb.com AS-SET Macro: AS-BTIRE | ASN: 2110
On 26 May 2016, at 15:09, William Waites <wwaites@tardis.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> writes:
Now when that is said, it's always also important to realise that with IPv4 space, the legacy old IP addresses, there isn't anything left; we have a small reserve so new members can get a /22, as we call it, around a thousand addresses, so they can start up a business. But this is not things you can build your future on. The only way to survive in the future is to implement v6 from the start, then you can get some v4 addresses so you can boot strap and still be connected to the legacy Internet, but it is possible today to build v6 networks and have transition mechanisms to v4 and that is the only sustainable way going forward.
It would be particularly valuable to have such a clear statement. For example, I have tried with limited success to get the Scottish government to require IPv6 deployment as a condition of providing grants to rural broadband projects. It is very difficult to get them to understand that this is very important for new networks, not just nice to have or something of interest to technical enthusiasts. I think a reasonably authoritative statement from the RIPE members would go some way towards convincing them.
Best wishes, -w
Hello Mick and William,
+1 from me.
Text like this is very straight forward and simple for all to understand the pressing need. Like William says below here I'd support the text fully!
Thank you for your support. I just want to note that you quoted the literal transcript from Hans Petter in your messages, not the "polished" text that I am planning to present, which is: ------------- It is important to realise that there isn't any IPv4 space left; the RIPE NCC has a small reserve so new members can get a /22 so they can start up a business, to bootstrap and to communicate with the legacy Internet. But this is not something anybody can build their future on. The only way to survive in the future is to implement IPv6 from the start. It is possible to build IPv6 networks today and have transition mechanisms to IPv4, and that is the only sustainable way forward. ------------- Please let me know if this is ok. Cheers, Sander
Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> writes:
------------- It is important to realise that there isn't any IPv4 space left; the RIPE NCC has a small reserve so new members can get a /22 so they can start up a business, to bootstrap and to communicate with the legacy Internet. But this is not something anybody can build their future on. The only way to survive in the future is to implement IPv6 from the start. It is possible to build IPv6 networks today and have transition mechanisms to IPv4, and that is the only sustainable way forward. -------------
Please let me know if this is ok.
Yes, it is ok with me. I might suggest adding a sentence: ... can built their future on. It is not sustainable to build an IPv4-only network today. The only way to survive ... Mainly to introduce the word "sustainable" which is a keyword for the audience that I am thinking about. Best, -w
Hi,
Yes, it is ok with me.
Thanks
I might suggest adding a sentence:
... can built their future on. It is not sustainable to build an IPv4-only network today. The only way to survive ...
Mainly to introduce the word "sustainable" which is a keyword for the audience that I am thinking about.
It already has the word "sustainable" a bit further down. In order not to complicate the consensus decision for the chairs I would prefer not to change the text now. Cheers, Sander
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 26/05/16 17:32, Sander Steffann wrote:
Hi,
Yes, it is ok with me.
Thanks
I might suggest adding a sentence:
... can built their future on. It is not sustainable to build an IPv4-only network today. The only way to survive ...
Mainly to introduce the word "sustainable" which is a keyword for the audience that I am thinking about.
It already has the word "sustainable" a bit further down. In order not to complicate the consensus decision for the chairs I would prefer not to change the text now.
Hey, Since I can't find Benno *and* there are voices of support *and* this stuff needs to be presented tomorrow morning I will dare to call a consensus. I think that the text in current form is a good message. Cheers and thnx, Jan -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJXRxfkAAoJEGlfIPo1wzUzVjsH/19ge10HNbVXkZYWWDr3kr3j W58zHOyVa0khc5kv2aMxACHC2J2Q/nES5NoRjQuSiFX0ra5XXMQb/i7kE08kL0m4 +Y0iRZ+UNx6eNo/EXNDFRgpqnvh/pM/VUHnl7wV3dm3iTshJdU5iOlZ3gvT3PSS5 nqysONOw45LMnBHS/dZ6WhUrp2W9hB9LTT/PweJiYs0tmM1mXkCQWS2xyjkZLIAh MTOwGGBwHhqOZwdZdRFAx8VEKl2yhdflSMmxad+WLDdYJeWxKCf2xrmOM31WWK85 /sWda/irLFeroehAhoqmCbyN/vYxMiPp3XuCm/vOX4InttBlscm/2vlPboLKKM8= =AW3e -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hi Jan,
Since I can't find Benno *and* there are voices of support *and* this stuff needs to be presented tomorrow morning I will dare to call a consensus.
I think that the text in current form is a good message.
Great! In that case I will submit it for the closing plenary right now :) Cheers, Sander
Hi Sander and Jan, Thanks for coordinating this and making this statement at the closing plenary session. Cheers, -- Benno On 26/05/16 17:37, Sander Steffann wrote:
Hi Jan,
Since I can't find Benno *and* there are voices of support *and* this stuff needs to be presented tomorrow morning I will dare to call a consensus.
I think that the text in current form is a good message.
Great! In that case I will submit it for the closing plenary right now :)
Cheers, Sander
-- Benno J. Overeinder NLnet Labs http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/
Hi,
Thanks for coordinating this and making this statement at the closing plenary session.
Unfortunately the plenary didn't accept the statement as a community statement/resolution as-is. The good news is that the reason for that is that they wanted a stronger statement :) Ruediger Volk was the person stating that on the microphone during the plenary, and he offered to help improve the language. I talked to Hans Petter Holen about what to do next, and he suggested taking this to the ripe-list so we can get consensus there and still turn this into a community-wide supported statement, which I think is important. I suggest Ruediger and I work on the text and then take it straight to the ripe-list. Doing word-smithing first in BCOP and then on the ripe-list will probably double the work, and as the BCOP task force already had consensus on the old version I'd like to take this directly to the superset :-) Do you agree with this plan? Cheers, Sander
Hi Sander, On 30/05/16 15:48, Sander Steffann wrote:
Thanks for coordinating this and making this statement at the closing plenary session.
Unfortunately the plenary didn't accept the statement as a community statement/resolution as-is. The good news is that the reason for that is that they wanted a stronger statement :) Ruediger Volk was the person stating that on the microphone during the plenary, and he offered to help improve the language. I talked to Hans Petter Holen about what to do next, and he suggested taking this to the ripe-list so we can get consensus there and still turn this into a community-wide supported statement, which I think is important.
I suggest Ruediger and I work on the text and then take it straight to the ripe-list. Doing word-smithing first in BCOP and then on the ripe-list will probably double the work, and as the BCOP task force already had consensus on the old version I'd like to take this directly to the superset :-)
Do you agree with this plan?
I was happy to hear that the plenary supported the idea, but asked for a stronger wording of the statement. The procedure you suggested makes sense to me. Best, - Benno -- Benno J. Overeinder NLnet Labs http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/
It already has the word "sustainable" a bit further down. In order not to complicate the consensus decision for the chairs I would prefer not to change the text now.
Sorry, you are right. I'm doing too many things at the same time right now! I agree not to change the text. -w
Hi,
Sorry, you are right. I'm doing too many things at the same time right now! I agree not to change the text.
I know that feeling :) Thanks! Sander
Hi all, As soon as I saw Jan Zorz was replying to this thread, I couldn't help but jump in. My name is Michael Oghia. I am (currently) an Istanbul-based journalist and editor, but I am also very active within the Internet community, follow RIPE activities, and care about IXP and IPv6 proliferation. If the text or any future text ever need proofreading, please feel free to forward it along to me. I don't have a technical background, so I if there is any other way I can help out or contribute to the community, do let me know. Best, -Michael __________________ Michael J. Oghia Istanbul, Turkey Journalist & editor 2015 ISOC IGF Ambassador Skype: mikeoghia Twitter <https://www.twitter.com/MikeOghia> *|* LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/mikeoghia> On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 6:59 PM, Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> wrote:
Hi,
Sorry, you are right. I'm doing too many things at the same time right now! I agree not to change the text.
I know that feeling :)
Thanks! Sander
Hello Michael,
As soon as I saw Jan Zorz was replying to this thread, I couldn't help but jump in.
My name is Michael Oghia. I am (currently) an Istanbul-based journalist and editor, but I am also very active within the Internet community, follow RIPE activities, and care about IXP and IPv6 proliferation. If the text or any future text ever need proofreading, please feel free to forward it along to me. I don't have a technical background, so I if there is any other way I can help out or contribute to the community, do let me know.
Thank you! Much appreciated. Sander
participants (7)
-
Benno Overeinder -
Jan Zorz -
Michael Oghia -
Mick O'Donovan -
Sander Steffann -
Sebastian Becker -
William Waites