[Bp_ipv6] Text of intervention during "Connecting the next billion"

Marco Hogewoning marcoh at ripe.net
Wed Nov 11 14:39:02 EST 2015

Dear Colleagues,

Attached the text in which we highlighted the work of this BPF to the IGF main session.

Once again I would like to thank all of you who contributed to the document and this mornings session.



Thank you Susan, Ambassador,  As one of the contributors, it is my pleasure to share some of the outcomes of the IPv6 best practices forum.

Of course that is the most important and very obvious conclusion that can be drawn from this process, and many people before me have stated the same: in order to connect the next billion people, we need IPv6.

That said the BPF in particular focussed on those elements that we think could create an environment that enables and promotes the deployment of IPv6.

What is especially important, besides international coordination, is to cooperate on a national level as well. A local IPv6 task force provides an efficient way to exchange experiences and distribute knowledge amongst the local operators, also it is a great way to coordinate amongst the different parties involved. In the BPF discussions we have identified several dependencies that exist, for example between providers of access services and those who provide content. Coordination on milestones and cooperation to align efforts could greatly increase the effect of IPv6 deployment in a national context.

That said and focussing on the topic of this afternoon session, which is the policy options that could contribute to this, our group identified two areas where governments specifically can contribute to create an environment that has a positive attitude towards IPv6.

The first thing would be to deploy IPv6 yourself. Governments are a large user of the Internet themselves and by deploying IPv6 on their own networks and services, they can provide an incentive for equipment manufacturers and service providers to deploy IPv6. Showing leadership can provide the local market with confidence that IPv6 is an option and stimulate them to adopt IPv6 in their products and services as well.

The second policy option our group would like to bring forward is to carefully evaluate existing policies and regulations for a protocol bias and more importantly any obstacles that would prevent or discourage people from deploying IPv6.

A local IPv6 task force could provide a great venue to discuss identify any issues and to discuss solutions that would be satisfactory to the objectives of all stakeholders involved and which lead to a more widespread adoption and use of IPv6.

Finally, we also discussed the continuation of the IPv6 best practice forum itself and more importantly any areas which we think this future work could focus on.

We think the inter sessional work and the tangible outcomes it produced, are a great contribution to human and institutional capacity building, the draft document we have open for comments was very well received by the community and several stakeholders have submitted comments in support of this work.

We therefor would like to the ask the IGF to continue this work towards the 2016 session. More specifically we would like to suggest to focus more on the economic decision making process that sits behind the decision to deploy IPv6. We feel that the potential financial impact of IPv6 adoption is key factor for the decision many businesses and other stakeholders have to make and further studying and documenting these mechanisms could be a great contribution to achieve our goals of the global deployment of IPv6 and finally in connecting the next billion users to the Internet.

More information about the Bp_ipv6 mailing list