Re: Ars Technica on IPv4 exhaustion

[Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>]

On Jun 19, 2014, at 07:02 , Lee Howard <lee () asgard org> wrote:

> > > I support a recommendation to consumer retailers to start requiring IPv6
> > > support in the stuff that they sell, but unfortunately I don¹t have very
> > > good data on how large of a request that actually is.
> >
> > In my experience, retailers will sell whatever flies off the shelves
> > without
> > regard to whether it¹s good for the consumer or not. As such, I believe
> > it¹s
> > more of a consumer education issue if we want to effect real change in
> > behavior
> > at this point.
>
> What would you tell consumers?

I'm not entirely sure. I'm the first to admit that direct to consumer communications are not my specialty and that 
guidance/input from others that are more expert is welcome.

Often the first step is identifying the problem and coming to consensus that consumer education is a vital part of the 
solution. Things I'd like to see get communicated to consumers:

        1.      The current addressing scheme for the internet is out of numbers and change is necessary.
        2.      Change has been in the works for several years, but has now reached the point where you (consumers) can 
benefit
                by paying attention and making intelligent and informed purchasing decisions.
        3.      There's plenty of vested interest out there that will happily take your money and leave you only on the 
old internet.
                Therefore, it is important to pay attention when choosing network equipment and other network-attached 
electronics.
        4.      New general purpose computers (desktop/laptop/tablet) are generally all compatible with the new 
protocol.
        5.      Only some routers/gateways/modems currently have IPv6 support.

Ideally, it would be nice if the UNH/IOL and/or CEA could come up with a meaningful definition of IPv6 support and a 
logo to go with it that we could tell consumers to look for on the box. Ideally, this would be a set of standards that 
users of the logo agree to abide by rather than a fee-based testing regime that excludes smaller players.

Obviously this is in a very rough form, but Lee's question is a legitimate one and deserves an answer. Hopefully in our 
collective talent pool, we can find ways to improve upon what I will say is a beginning straw man at best.

Owen