[Bp_ipv6] Scheduling an initial call; gentle reminder for feedback on Scope and Goals

Izumi Okutani izumi at nic.ad.jp
Fri May 22 19:38:59 EDT 2015


Hi Marco and all,


Thanks for this input and sorry we didn't have time to cover these points at the last call.

> My take regarding scope/goal is that we need to try and identify who in the end we would like to take action/change, who do we want to adopt at this stage?  The quick answer would be ���everybody���, but afraid that we are biting off more than we can chew in this short timeframe and better try and focus on a few particular items/players in the value chain.
> 
> Feedback in our circles suggest there is still a deficiency on the supply side of things, IPv6 access and services is available but usually from a limited number of suppliers, which creates bottlenecks for entities willing to deploy. Various scenarios exist  and have been tried to break out of this and motivate the market to supply the necessary services and products.

Indeed, and this is also related to the point Arson mentioned at the call as well, in communicating more to promote products to be IPv6 ready.
As, a related point, I don't remember whether it was at the call or at some other occasion but I also recall an idea of reaching out to certain groups of vendors, for example, to request DOCSIS support in IPv6.

> At the same time, there is still a lot of ground to cover with the users of these products as well. Both in public sector as well as private (enterprise, SME) a lot of people seem to struggle with the topic at hand and sharing of experience and information between innovators/early adopters and the majority could be of major influence to a speedy and smooth adoption of IPv6.

Yes. In addition, as an issue related to users, a point raised by a participant during Aron's talk at the IPv6 WG session at RIPE70 meeting last week (and in many other occasions too):
https://ripe70.ripe.net/archives/video/88/

If we are to cover these points, do we want to consider "venders/suppliers" and "end-site organizations (public and private sectors)" as a target as well, or would "government/policy makers" sufficient, which is what is indentified so far? (See "Target of this document": http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/bp_ipv6_intgovforum.org/2015-May/000015.html) 

> We can probably turn both in a workable problem statement and there are countless efforts we can look at and analyse for success or failure. I would however see if we can limit it to one of the two.

OK. So, if we put this into a problem statement it could look like (preliminary and open to edits) -  

 "IPv6 access and services are available but this is not enough as an environment for wide spread adoption of IPv6. More products and services need to be IPv6 ready, as number of suppliers are limited, which creates bottlenecks for entities willing to deploy. Further, in public sector as well as private (enterprise, SME) a lot of people seem to struggle with the topic at hand and sharing of experience and information between innovators/early adopters."

Does this seem to reflect your point adequately Marco?

Does anyone have any comments on this, on whether these two points sufficiently cover as a problem statement for the scope of our group -  which is to share best practices in creating an environment to encourage widespread IPv6 adoption?
 
> As for the initial discussion, I also very much like the idea of including some analysis of less successful approaches and the lessons learned from them.

Right, thanks for indicating this. As oftern said, we tend to learn a lot more from issues people have struggled and lesssons learned.



Izumi

On 2015/05/21 19:52, Marco Hogewoning wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> My take regarding scope/goal is that we need to try and identify who in the end we would like to take action/change, who do we want to adopt at this stage?  The quick answer would be ���everybody���, but afraid that we are biting off more than we can chew in this short timeframe and better try and focus on a few particular items/players in the value chain.
> 
> Feedback in our circles suggest there is still a deficiency on the supply side of things, IPv6 access and services is available but usually from a limited number of suppliers, which creates bottlenecks for entities willing to deploy. Various scenarios exist  and have been tried to break out of this and motivate the market to supply the necessary services and products.
> 
> At the same time, there is still a lot of ground to cover with the users of these products as well. Both in public sector as well as private (enterprise, SME) a lot of people seem to struggle with the topic at hand and sharing of experience and information between innovators/early adopters and the majority could be of major influence to a speedy and smooth adoption of IPv6.
> 
> We can probably turn both in a workable problem statement and there are countless efforts we can look at and analyse for success or failure. I would however see if we can limit it to one of the two.
> 
> As for the initial discussion, I also very much like the idea of including some analysis of less successful approaches and the lessons learned from them.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Marco Hogewoning
> 





More information about the Bp_ipv6 mailing list