[131251] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv4 sunset date set for 2019-12-31
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Franck Martin)
Thu Oct 21 17:31:21 2010
X-Barracuda-Envelope-From: franck@genius.com
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 09:31:03 +1200 (FJT)
From: Franck Martin <franck@genius.com>
To: Michael Dillon <wavetossed@googlemail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikgUZwxCKYqsvZDULJfxjRT+bNNjGNMCrA19e+t@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Putting a sunset clause will happen but when it won't matter much. We are n=
ot there yet.
However, I could see it also coming from a vendor as a way to get customers=
to upgrade (after that date we will not support IPv4 anymore and provide p=
atches for IPv4).=20
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Dillon" <wavetossed@googlemail.com>
To: "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org>
Sent: Friday, 22 October, 2010 9:24:57 AM
Subject: Re: IPv4 sunset date set for 2019-12-31
>> How would you respond if that were announced?
>
>> If I were king for a day,
>
> But you aren't. =C2=A0No one is.
>
> The core requirement for such announcements is that there be a real
> enforcement arm.
Not necessarily. If you announce that YOU will treat that date as a
sunset date for IPv4 and invite other organizations to sign up for the
declaration, you might be able to get a movement going. Alice's
Restaurant comes to mind as does the Cluetrain Manifesto.
> The best that can be done with respect to declaring a IPv4 sunset date is
> localized pockets of such control.
>
> One could, of course, imagine a federation of such pockets...
That is too top down, and sounds too much like the ITU, a federation
of governments.
I don't think that would work but a voluntary manifesto that people
could sign up to would work.
--Michael Dillon
