[address-policy-wg] Re: [ppml] Is the time for conservation over?

In a message written on Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 01:54:45PM +0000, Michael.Dillon at radianz.com wrote:
> Therefore, I believe that all the RIRs should jointly do some research
> to establish a prudent date at which IPv6 will be considered to have
> reached critical mass so that there will be a significant migration of
> users from IPv4 to IPv6. Once we set our sights on this date we should

I am going to strongly disagree on this point at this time.  We
don't know that there will /ever/ be a strong migration of users
to IPv6.  IPv6 may yet flop completely, be replaced by IPv8 or
something before it ever reaches full deployment, or even always
live side by side with IPv4.

Even if we assume everything migrates to IPv6, I see no reason why
we should change IPv4 policy at all.  First, if people are migrating
IPv4 policy becomes irrevelant anyway.  Second, if the IPv4 policy
is hinderng things we should fix it in IPv6 policy to more quickly
encourage cut over.

-- 
       Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request at tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20031027/677eeee3/attachment.sig>