[lacnog] IPv6 Transitional Uncertainties

[Carlos A. Afonso]

Households, not individuals. Saying it is a lie does not solve the
actual problem.

--c.a.

On 09/14/2011 07:15 PM, Fernando Gont wrote:
> On 09/14/2011 08:27 AM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
>>
>> Taking some large numbers: Latin America for example, with 100 million
>> households, in which all countries' governnments in one way or another
>> are promising universal broadband for 2014, 
> 
> If "universal broadband" means that every citizen of the country will
> have broadband access to the Internet in their homes, then:
> 
> 1) Could you please provide pointers for these statements?
> 2) "consider the source" before believing the statements
> 3) Whoever made this promise probably needs a reality check (* modulo
> the above) and/or stop lying to people
> 
> (*) Unless governments receive external funding from external
> organizations to provide this broadband access, or telcos are willing to
> provide it for free, then I'm afraid the governments of many of the
> aforementioned countries (at least Argentina) should probably (first, or
> instead) promise:
> * universal access to a *home*
> * universal access to food
> * that kids won't need to work to help their families surive
> * etc.
> 
> (you get the picture)
> 
> 
>> both fixed and via mobile,
>> starting from a current situation in which this means triplicating, even
>> sextuplicating real IP connections. Are you sure that by 2014 we will
>> have such a full IPv6 deployment so that in this expansion we can simply
>> forget about IPv4 scarcity?
> 
> Nobody ever made this statement!
> 
> 
> 
>> I see a situation in which every household will probably need two, three
>> real IPv4 IPs each (3G/LTE smartphones, ADSL etc) with very little
> 
> I'd love to see a world in which every family actually has a household.
> 
> 
> 
>> possibility of reuse since most will be permanent connections, unless in
>> less than three years IPv6 will be fully deployed throughtout the
>> Internet. Brazil and Argentina alone will probably need about 30-40
>> million new IPv4 addresses by 2014 
> 
> What are the maths for these numbers?
> 
> Note: It's clear that one should fail on the safe side, and plan for
> IPv6 deployment. However, it's also clear that most big companies have
> not been playing on the safe side... so it's probably a matter of policy
> (i.e., "you know what? -- You've so far consumed X percent of the
> LACNIC's pool and have not bothered to deploy IPv6, even when we have
> warned you for the last 10 years... therefore you won't get anymore
> addresses past 2012 -- what we have left will be used for new companies
> entering the game")
> 
> Thanks,