North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: IPv6 news

  • From: Marshall Eubanks
  • Date: Fri Oct 14 12:15:46 2005

Dear Sabri;

On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 16:34:19 +0200
 Sabri Berisha <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2005 at 10:17:51AM -0400, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
> Dear Marshall,
> > > Just wait for a popular adult-content-provider offering website-access
> > > for free via IPv6.. 
> > 
> > Why ? Are you implying that there is unlimited free IPv6 bandwidth ?
> Nope.
> > If not, why would they do that ?
> Imagine the following scenario:
>  "It's 2009, the world reaches the end of it's ipv4 supply. As large
>   global networks are still struggling to implement ipv6 on their
>   equipment, their customers are facing more and more problems to get
>   additional IP-space from their RIR's and are forced to use ipv6. But
>   due to the lack of planning, only a number of access-isp's have
>   successfully deployed ipv6 on their networks and so we have shattered
>   native ipv6 connectivity throughout the internet. To encourage the
>   access- and carrierindustry, (adult)contentproviders in all continents
>   decide to boost the demand for ipv6 connectivity and offer their
>   services for free to ipv6 users, for a limited period of time."

Try as I may, I cannot imagine depending on the charity of porn content providers :)
What I can imagine is the porn providers paying whatever is necessary for IPv4 address
blocks. I would not want to get in a bidding war with them.

> Why did the internet grow so fast in the 90's? The public was able to
> access the network and created the demand for more content. This content
> attracted more and more eyeballs, and thus more commercial activities
> were deployed, resulting in a exponential growth of the network.
> Without eyeballs, contentproviders are not encouraged to deploy ipv6.
> Without content, eyeballproviders are not encouraged to deploy ipv6.
> It's a matter of time before one of them will be forced to end this
> circle and there is only one way to attract a large audience: giving a
> way your service for (nearly) free.

This sounds just like arguments heard in multicast discussions. I do give my
content away for free, and currently realizes about 10% of its 
(streaming) revenue from multicast (and presumably also realizes a similar percentage reduction in
bandwidth costs from the same).

If I thought that AFTV could increase revenues by another 10% by putting out IPv6 reflections of
existing content, it would. If I thought that it could make money by putting out dedicated IPv6
content, it would do that too. I don't see any reason to expect either at present. I would be glad
to be convinced otherwise.

> -- 
> Sabri


> please do not throw salami pizza away