[members-discuss] New Charging Scheme
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] New Charging Scheme
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] New Charging Scheme
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Vesna Manojlovic
BECHA at ripe.net
Wed Aug 10 13:44:24 CEST 2011
For what it's worth... some extra information about IPv6 deployment levels: On 8/9/11 3:48 AM, Ivan M Makarenko wrote: > Let me describe the situation from my point of view. > > I think that it is not LARGE members who must be putting forward to > deploy IPv6, but exactly a MEDIUM/SMALL. We did analysis of "IPv6 Ripeness" in June last year, and Emile Aben published the results in an article on Labs: http://labs.ripe.net/Members/emileaben/content-ipv6-ripeness-sequel First graph confirms Ivan's opinion: http://labs.ripe.net/Members/emileaben/images/userfiles-image-v6ripeness-v6-ripeness-category.png Our of 62 members on "extra large" billing category, 80% had v6 space, and 40% had all "4 stars" on IPv6 Ripeness; "large" are also above the average/median. You can see that the hight of relative IPv6 Ripeness levels are directly proportional to the category size. Regards, Vesna Manojlovic, RIPE NCC > Assuming LARGE members as > a (mostly) IP transit operators and M/S as a broadband access, we > get an exactly "IPv6 chicken-and-the-egg" problem. In our region, > we have enough IPv6 transit operators (most of whom are LARGE), > but *no* broadband access IPv6 providers. As I see, providing pure IPv6 > transit is much more easy/cheap than deploying broadband access IPv6 > networks - and that's the main issue. Well, if we will reduce IPv4 > cost for small holders and increase it for large ones, we'll get > nothing in terms of "IPv6 popularization". There still will be > empty pipes and no content. > > Don't get me wrong and don't blame me as an "LARGE snob" - I consider > wiwi model/proposal as fair, but I don't think it could be an elixir for > IPv6 development. It is the shortage of IPv4 space that will be the > reason, not the "price of IPv4" (and the IPv4 black markets, if any, > will regulate themselves). > > -- > Best regards, > Ivan M.Makarenko, Head of Internet technologies division, R&D Department. > JSC "Zap-SibTranstelecom", Novosibirsk, Russia
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] New Charging Scheme
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] New Charging Scheme
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]