This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] DRAFT: RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 Depletion and Deployment of IPv6
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] DRAFT: RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 Depletion and Deployment of IPv6
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] DRAFT: RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 Depletion and Deployment of IPv6
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
jordi.palet at consulintel.es
Thu Oct 18 17:56:22 CEST 2007
Well, I don't agree you're not part of the community. Being subscriber and poster to the mailing is a qualifier for being a member :-) Agree with Florian and you. It is needed to say something to remind vendors that market is already asking for IPv6 support. I don't think they should just wait for the demand to come, because then it will be late. So a warning to them is a good thing. Same for software developers, they should realize that they can take advantage of IPv6 NOW, because even if there are no native access providers yet, transition is available in end-hosts. There is no immediate need for low costs CPEs, of course is good to have, but transition tools in end-hosts already deliver the same, until access providers provide dual stack, then of course, CPEs with allow dual stack on the WAN link are needed. Regards, Jordi > De: Patrick Vande Walle <patrick at vande-walle.eu> > Responder a: <patrick at vande-walle.eu> > Fecha: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 11:26:09 +0200 > Para: <address-policy-wg at ripe.net> > CC: <ipv6-wg at ripe.net> > Asunto: Re: [address-policy-wg] DRAFT: RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 > Depletion and Deployment of IPv6 > > Florian Weimer wrote: >> * Gert Doering: >> >>> 2) We urge network operators and Internet Service Providers >>> (ISPs) to deploy 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. >>> >> >> Shouldn't this paragraph target RIPE members specifically? Or, put >> differently, why are end users and software vendors excluded? >> > Speaking as an end user, which probably does not qualify me as being > part of the "RIPE Community": > > Agree with Florian's comments, and I would add hardware vendors to the > list. As long as there are no commodity CPEs supporting IPv6, there is > no incentive for ISPs to deploy IPv6 to their end users, especially > those targetting the home users. > > -- > Patrick Vande Walle > ********************************************** 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.
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] DRAFT: RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 Depletion and Deployment of IPv6
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] DRAFT: RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 Depletion and Deployment of IPv6
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]