Hi Jen and group, * Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com> [191005 04:20]:

As a co-chair I'm excited to see some discussion happening here, especially after the list has been quiet for a while. I'm less excited to see that some people have started giving up hope and telling the rest of use we shall give up to..

well, we all have our dark moments, I guess. At least it worked to kick off some lively discussions.

By a lucky coincidence we have 10 mins open-mic slot during IPv6 WG session in Rotterdam to discuss what the WG is doing and what we, as a community, want it to do (however after reading all those threads I'm afraid 10 mins might not be enough).

I guess some of the discussions will be moved to the hall track :-)

What I'd like to ask you meantime is to think what the priorities and goals are. Get IPv6 adoption to 100%? (Is it realistic? Shall we target to 100%?) Convince everyone that IPv6 is good and IPv4 shall be turned off? Provide a venue for those who are interested to discuss the topic and share the experience (including negative one? Produce documents (or recommendations?) Educate people? What should be considered as success, what is the failure and what is just a roadblock?

I see two groups of people we should work with: a) Newcomers and small LIRs who find it difficult to grow or even get off the ground because IPv4 addresses are hard to get. And even if there are some on the market, many of them will be barely usable because they have been used by dedicated spam or malware hosters in the past. Looking at my blacklists this appears to be the case e.g. for a significant percentage of 185/8, which I expect are the blocks that will get on the market in the near future. This group will not be able to build a full dual stack network but will have a few outward facing systems with globally routable IPv4 addresses (or better dual-stack) and will have to use either IPv6-only or private IPv4 space (or both) internally. The working group should provide guidance, best practices and examples of successful deployments (including the problems encountered and solved) for the IPv6 based solutions. b) Established LIRs that never thought of doing anything with IPv6 because they have more than enough available IPv4 space for their use. This group will have the problem that they are badly reachable from an ever growing part of the internet, which would be group a) They might not even notice at first while group a) is still small, and because group a) will provide adaption mechanisms on their side, but give it a couple of years and the problem will grow big enough to hurt. The working group should provide group b) with guidance how to make at least their outward facing services available on dual stack. Wolfgang