Mexico to Stop IPv4 Address Assignments Starting 2011

[Fred Baker]

CERNET2, certain parts of the US Army, among others. I get this in  
v6ops in the form of "we want to turn off IPv4 and still carry IPv4  
traffic, let's build a transition strategy"; you can probably guess  
my standing reply.

There is a certain sense in which it makes sense; if like many of my  
customers you are planning an IPv6 address space request because  
there isn't adequate capacity for your IPv4 plans, the next question  
is "how do my IPv6 customers talk with my IPv4 customers". My  
standard response is "if it is important the the latter, have them  
turn up IPv6 in parallel with their IPv4". I do get asked, though,  
why not simply convert them to IPv6 and turn down IPv4.

I'm not that much of a zealot.

On Jun 28, 2007, at 8:25 AM, David Conrad wrote:

> Hi,
>
>> I am of the opinion that IPv4 will be with us for quite a while,  
>> and the widely-proposed IPv4 turn-down makes no business sense.
>
> I agree.  Could you point me to an example of "the widely-proposed  
> IPv4 turn-down"?
>
> Thanks,
> -drc