How long much advanced notice do ISPs need to deploy IPv6?

Wed Oct 22 17:26:40 UTC 2003

The "RIGHT" way, absent a clear and compelling need to do it is DON'T.

I will now clarify...

In order to make such a change, the following criteria should be required
prior to consideration:

	1.	There must be a clear and compelling reason for the change.
		Verisign's financial gain isn't a clear and compelling reason
		for the entire internet.  Providing better directory assistance
		an innovative features might be, but...

	2.	There must be no alternative method for implementing the
		"clear and compelling" capability or service which could
		be implemented without such radical or abrupt change.

	3.	It must not pose any significant or demonstrable risk to
		existing infrastructure.

If it meets these criteria, then, it should be proposed to the appropriate 
body
and be discussed in the community.  If there is general community support 
for
moving forward, the community should be involved in developing the 
implementation
schedule and details.  During this process any further issues with 
cooperation
or interoperation with existing services should be identified, discussed, 
tested,
and mitigations developed where appropriate.  In any case where the communty
does not feel adequate mitigation exists, the proposal should be postponed 
until
such time as these issues are resolved.

Verisign's proposal might marginally meet 1.  It definitely doesn't meet 2,
and, it certainly doesn't meet 3.  As such, we should simply not do it.

Owen

--On Wednesday, October 22, 2003 12:16:08 PM -0400 Terry Baranski 
<tbaranski at mail.com> wrote:

>
> Christian Kuhtz wrote:
>>
>> So, since there won't be a flag day, ...
>
> Maybe that's the point.  The notion of Internet flag days has largely
> disappeared as the Internet's ubiquity and criticality have increased.
> There won't be flag days for IPv6, S(o)BGP, BGP-5, etc.
>
> So what's a company like Verisign to do when they want to substantially
> change the way the COM and NET zones work? (And is the answer different
> if they want to make these changes solely for their own financial gain?)
> If an incremental rollout isn't possible here, then folks end up in the
> fairly rare position of trying to figure out how to roll out a
> significant change that will affect the entire Internet at what will
> essentially be the flip of a switch.  Clearly, "pulling a Verisign" and
> doing it without notifying anybody beforehand isn't the right way.  But
> this alone doesn't make it much easier to decide what *is* the right
> way.
>
> -Terry
>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20031022/5b5379ef/attachment.sig>