[Bp_ipv6] Call for contributions - Preparation (Feedback to questions by: 22nd July)

Eduardo Barasal Morales emorales at nic.br
Thu Jul 21 21:45:19 EDT 2016


**

*Hi,*

*

I'm not sure if I'm thinking right, but I suggest putting in the
questionnaire three other questions.


1) Did your customer experienced any financial and/or technical impact
when your company deployed IPv6?


2) Is there anything that your company could have done different in the
planning that might have saved money?


3) Is there anything that your company could have done different in the
planning that would improve the deployment?

**

What do you think about it?


Regards,

Eduardo Barasal Morales

*


On 21-07-2016 14:07, Izumi Okutani wrote:
> Thanks for the good questions and offer to help Michael!
>
>
> IoT:
> I think it is worth mentioning IoT in our document. Whether to have a
> dedicated section - What does everyone think?
> If you think we should have a dedicated section, I welcome to hear
> ideas on what can go in as contents.
>
> 5G:
> Just to make sure I understood, do you mean in the context that 5G
> mobile service should be IPv6 capable including it handsets?
> Assuming this is the case, I personally think it is worth mentioning
> it but welcome any other feedback from everyone on this list.
>
> Michael, please point out if I didn't quite capture your intention.
>
>
> Editing:
> Thanks for the offer and it is really nice to have participants with
> great enthusiasm. I appreciate that you explicitly asked on how you
> can contribute.
> Once we have more contents, I think your input with non-technical
> knowledge, whether a certain explanation makes sense would be very
> valuable, as the expected readers would be non-technical people.
> Wim and Sumon (as MAG Coordinator) may have other ideas on how you can
> help us.
>
>
>
> This got me to think that it applies to other participants who may not
> have direct contacts to case studies.
>
> If you observe challenges in IPv6 deployment and have non-technical
> questions to those organisations which have deployed IPv6, this would
> make a helpful contribution to our group.
>
> Please do share - Especially if there is anything to add to the draft
> questions to the contributors: (Friendly reminder: comment close at
> UTC23:59 22nd July)
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hzk0c_HAvtv1V4uURNWJhFmRNL7NpJGgcoTEtWGHRP8/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
>
> Izumi
>
> On 2016/07/21 14:36, Michael Oghia wrote:
>> P.S. And in addition to IPv6 + IoT, would we want to mention 5G?
>> https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/targeted-consultation-co-ordinated-introduction-5g-networks-europe
>>
>>
>> -Michael
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 8:29 AM, Michael Oghia <mike.oghia at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> First of all, welcome Eduardo and Guillermo!
>>>
>>> Second, Izumi: will we have a section solely dedicated to the
>>> connection
>>> between IPv6 and IoT? (E.g.,
>>> http://www.circleid.com/posts/20160412_is_ipv6_an_essential_precondition_for_internet_of_things/
>>>
>>> ).
>>>
>>> Lastly, Wim and Izumi: let me know if you need any editing
>>> assistance from
>>> me. I unfortunately suffer from the problem of high enthusiasm but low
>>> technical knowledge. So, I am happy to help in any other way I can
>>> (editing, research, outreach, etc.).
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> -Michael
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 5:20 AM, Izumi Okutani <izumi at nic.ad.jp> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Excellent, thank you very much Guillermo, Eduardo!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Additional recommendations for Case Studies:
>>>> Internet banking and mobile banking with IPv6 certainly has strong
>>>> synergies with the scope of the group this year, and cases which
>>>> have not
>>>> been widely shared across different stakeholders much.
>>>> I appreciate that your volunteering to contact the organisations,
>>>> Eduardo. I also see Guillermo has listed a few organisations in the
>>>> Latin
>>>> American region and has volunteered to contact. Thank you.
>>>>
>>>> *I continue to welcome inputs from everyone for case studies,
>>>> especially
>>>> for the economies listed.
>>>> If there are other interesting cases, please also feel free to
>>>> share and
>>>> we can discuss whether/how it could fit in.*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Economic Analysis:
>>>> *I welcome contributions on this part (part i) as well. If you can
>>>> share
>>>> links, references, they are very much appreciated.*
>>>>
>>>> Thank you Guillermo for additional details on the references on the
>>>> economic analysis.
>>>> They are helpful reference for part i., on analysis from economic
>>>> perspective on IPv6 adoption.
>>>>
>>>> The presentation shared by Geoff would fit in well on the economic
>>>> perspective and it is a very helpful reference.
>>>> Quoting out some of the interesting observations on the current
>>>> situation
>>>> which caught my attention:
>>>>
>>>>   - While most of the V6 activity in terms of user counts is
>>>> confined to 30
>>>> ISPs, just 5 of ISPs have any significant IPv6 deployments
>>>>   - The 30 largest ISPs service 42% of the entire Internet user
>>>> population
>>>>     If these 30 providers were to achieve an average 50% IPv6
>>>> uptake in
>>>> their customer base, then the total IPv6 capability level across
>>>> would be
>>>> 20% today, rather than 3.6%
>>>>   -A number of these largest ISPs operate in the developing world
>>>>     With a tendency to be late adopters so as to reduce capital
>>>> risk for
>>>> their enterprise
>>>>
>>>> I see that the presentation also touches on “value” of an ISP's
>>>> customers
>>>> in relation to per capita GDP, which is an interesting way of
>>>> looking at
>>>> the potential for IPv6 deployment from economic aspect.
>>>> Many thanks Geoff for sharing the link!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Quoting from Marco -
>>>>
>>>> What is most interesting in your preso is that it is only a few
>>>> carriers
>>>>> that make all the difference right now. As for this project, there
>>>>> appear a
>>>>> few big parties who, cost or not, have a case for IPv6. Maybe it
>>>>> is worth
>>>>> going to their public results to see if they are doing better or
>>>>> worse
>>>>> compared to those who just keep throwing money at IPc4 and NATs,
>>>>> but it
>>>>> might be hard to come up with something like that in the relative
>>>>> short
>>>>> time frame we have.
>>>>>
>>>>> You happen to know if somebody already looked into this kind of
>>>>> stuff?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *If anyone can recommend people who conducts such analysis, or any
>>>> analysis which would be relevant for part i. or our work,
>>>> suggestions are
>>>> welcome.*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Izumi
>>>>
>>>> On 2016/07/21 10:27, Eduardo Barasal Morales wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> *
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> My name is Eduardo Barasal Morales and I work for the Brazilian
>>>>> Network
>>>>> Information Center (NIC.br), a non-profit organization that tries to
>>>>> improve the Internet quality in**Brazil, in a project called
>>>>> IPv6.br. In
>>>>> this project, our mission is to disseminate knowledge about IPv6 with
>>>>> courses, web site, book and workshops.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I am new at this mailing list and I think I can contribute with the
>>>>> document “Understanding the commercial and economic incentives
>>>>> beneath a
>>>>> successful IPv6 deployment” .  I can be the volunteer to contact Uol
>>>>> (content provider), Globo (content provider), Vivo (large ISP), and
>>>>> Claro (large ISP). Besides that, I would like to suggest to add other
>>>>> companies, like Banrisul, a bank that has *I*nternet banking and
>>>>> mobile
>>>>> banking with IPv6, and Fasternet (small ISP). I will try to find
>>>>> others.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Eduardo Barasal Morales
>>>>>
>>>>> *
>>>>> On 20-07-2016 12:29, Guillermo Cicileo wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello Izumi:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've updated the document with organizations from EC, PE and BR.
>>>>>> Also I added to the brainstorming section some references about
>>>>>> economic aspects of IPv6 transition and an interactive economic
>>>>>> model
>>>>>> for evaluating the alternatives which is available at LACNIC's IPv6
>>>>>> Portal.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>         Guillermo.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Izumi Okutani <izumi at nic.ad.jp
>>>>>> <mailto:izumi at nic.ad.jp>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>       Dear Colleagues,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>       I would like to call for contributions to contents of the
>>>>>> output
>>>>>>       documents.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>       IPv6 BPF is looking for contents in two parts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>        i. Analysis from economic perspective on IPv6 adoption
>>>>>>        ii. Case Studies on business decisions behind IPv6 adoption
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>       Based on this, I would like to seek for your inputs on three
>>>>>> points.
>>>>>>       Thanks to everyone who engage in this group and looking
>>>>>> forward to
>>>>>>       receive your inputs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>       *1) Questions to contributors of Case Studies*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>       For contributions for ii., I welcome your feedback on the
>>>>>>       questions for the contributors to the case studies.
>>>>>>       Once agreed, we would like to request you to reach out to your
>>>>>>       contacts, based on the list of organisations in 2).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>          Draft questions to contributors:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hzk0c_HAvtv1V4uURNWJhFmRNL7NpJGgcoTEtWGHRP8/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>
>>>>>>          How to provide inputs          : Please add your
>>>>>> comments to
>>>>>>       the above google doc
>>>>>>          Close feedback                 : 22nd July UTC23:59
>>>>>>
>>>>>>       In the meantime, I encourage you to start reaching out to
>>>>>>       organisations you have contacts for, before waiting for the
>>>>>>       questions to be fixed, as heads up.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>       *2) List of organisations for Case Studies*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>       If you know organisations which have commercially deployed
>>>>>> IPv6 in
>>>>>>       the following countries, please list your suggestions in the
>>>>>>       google doc below.
>>>>>>       The basic approach is to identify countries with high IPv6
>>>>>>       deployment rate and to reach out to organisations which have
>>>>>>       commercially deployed IPv6 in those economies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>          How to provide inputs :
>>>>>>          Please fill in the table "IV. Volunteers to Collect Case
>>>>>> Studies"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C7z8MRVBOmBsuWxpl8YivXZWFvksKCq0_ul7TlFJzIU/edit
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>          Time frame: Before the next IPv6 BPF call (Date is
>>>>>> currently
>>>>>>       coordinated by Wim by Doodle Poll)
>>>>>>                      While this is not final fixed deadline e
>>>>>> would like
>>>>>>       to confirm and review case studies received at the next call.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>       This list is based on over 10 % IPv6 Capable, per statistics
>>>>>>       provided by APNIC labs: http://stats.labs.apnic.net/ipv6/
>>>>>>       We would need to consider regional balance at the end, as
>>>>>> Europe
>>>>>>       appears at a high rate.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>               BE Belgium, Western Europe, Europe
>>>>>>               US United States of America, Northern America,
>>>>>> Americas
>>>>>>               DE Germany, Western Europe, Europe
>>>>>>               CH Switzerland, Western Europe, Europe
>>>>>>               GR Greece, Southern Europe, Europe
>>>>>>               PT Portugal, Southern Europe, Europe
>>>>>>               EC Ecuador, South America, Americas
>>>>>>               LU Luxembourg, Western Europe, Europe
>>>>>>               PE Peru, South America, Americas
>>>>>>               EE Estonia, Northern Europe, Europe
>>>>>>               JP Japan, Eastern Asia, Asia
>>>>>>               FI Finland, Northern Europe, Europe
>>>>>>               GB United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
>>>>>> Ireland,
>>>>>>       Northern Europe, Europe
>>>>>>               MY Malaysia, South-Eastern Asia, Asia
>>>>>>               FR France, Western Europe, Europe
>>>>>>               CA Canada, Northern America, Americas
>>>>>>               BR Brazil, South America, Americas
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>       *3) Brainstorming for output document*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>       I welcome any other feedback on brainstorming for output
>>>>>> document
>>>>>>
>>>>>>         How to provide inputs : Please add your comments to the
>>>>>> google
>>>>>>       doc below  (same link as 2))
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hzk0c_HAvtv1V4uURNWJhFmRNL7NpJGgcoTEtWGHRP8/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>       Regards,
>>>>>>       Izumi
>>>>>>
>>>>>>       _______________________________________________
>>>>>>       Bp_ipv6 mailing list
>>>>>>       Bp_ipv6 at intgovforum.org <mailto:Bp_ipv6 at intgovforum.org>
>>>>>>      
>>>>>> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/bp_ipv6_intgovforum.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Bp_ipv6 mailing list
>>>>>> Bp_ipv6 at intgovforum.org
>>>>>> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/bp_ipv6_intgovforum.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Bp_ipv6 mailing list
>>>>> Bp_ipv6 at intgovforum.org
>>>>> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/bp_ipv6_intgovforum.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Bp_ipv6 mailing list
>>>> Bp_ipv6 at intgovforum.org
>>>> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/bp_ipv6_intgovforum.org
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/bp_ipv6_intgovforum.org/attachments/20160721/f0cf91d7/attachment.html>


More information about the Bp_ipv6 mailing list