Self-Citation More than 7 papers at places of least relevance Nothing new except for the problem We stress however that our proposal is somewhat motivated by… Our proposal, along the lines described in [33]… - Taken right from the paper Meet the paper without Conclusion (Ok… There is a section on Discussion)

Something, somewhere, went terrible wrong! Authors: Sylvia Ratnasamy Scott Shenker Steven McCanne Presentation By: Rahul Potharaju Theodore Brockly

Even Asimov’s Robotics laws will come to their knees! Assumptions spoilt the game… For instance, take A4  Revenue Flow We know that IPvN is great because of its benefits but who will convince the “normal” not-so-hi-tech consumers? Alright, ISP will claim “Faster, Faster and even more Faster”  cliché

So let us consider IPv8 but wait… What does it contain in the first place? What if the long awaited IPv8 increases reliability and security at the cost of throughput? No more advertisements for the ISP! IPv8  Encapsulation of all IPv8 packets through non IPv8 networks  Even lower throughput  What will happen to the users who chose the “advanced” ISP? What if the “revenue gained” is offset due to the overhead incurred by the initial implementation of the new architecture?

Anycast is proposed as an alternative to ISP upgrades and Overlays. Two methods for deployment of Anycast: – ISP Policy Change – Aggregatable address Overlay Anycast is simply a lightweight routing Overlay

Anycast still requires several “next gen” service providers to show any gains. – Will Anycast scale?  They say they are not concerned about scalability! – Completely mitigate the gain of new architectures? – No one knows. Would still require an extraordinary amount of cooperation between ISPs.

Running Anycast discourages evolution just as much as overlays – First mover advantage almost nonexistent – Multiple adopters needed to show gains No incentive whatsoever to deploy. – Why should I help out Next Gen competitor X?

Even if the architecture was adopted against ISP's interests – Opens the door for a variety of incompatible protocols Across networks, nations – Creates hidden costs through added complexity – Complicates current work in the IP space (such as capability systems)‏ – Does not support router dependent protocols Unfortunately our approach does not assist in the deployment of architectures… certain QoS proposals… - Taken from the paper

ISP X ISP A ISP B ISP C Why am I subsidizing X? Nice that I am getting money from settlement payments Some or all of them will block IPv8 So what should the customers do? Spend time and money to switch providers Simply return to IPv4 (more likely because none of us even know what IPv8 is!)

ISPs are not simply going to let forerunners steal all of their business, and may not simply surrender and upgrade their IP architectures to the highest level due to the overhead of making changes.

To use IPv8, any end host can simply encapsulate an IPv8 packet in an IPv4 packet with destination A4… - Taken right from the paper How do you rule out the possibility of spoofing, ARP poisoning etc…? Biggest issue with Anycast itself  Any service which relies on it might not function properly in the case that the address is blackholed due to whatever reasons, or if anyone close by isn’t offering service, you could end up traveling to the ends of the earth to get DNS service.

Good Intentions but bad reasoning throughout the paper After reading your paper, we thought that perhaps a revolution is needed just to understand the contribution! More elaboration on how to fix the “architectural flaw of the lack of incentives”, but not a mere “walk-through of design options and their implications with little to offer in novel mechanisms or radical insights”

Let us say IPv8 becomes famous and everyone wants it The brilliant ISP X has implemented it  All IPv8 traffic from ISPs A,B,C etc… will be going through ISP X provided that IP Anycast routing and advertising-by-proxy is being used. But these rival ISPs are not so happy – they are subsidizing their biggest competitor, who, although not drawing large number of new subscribers, is getting money through settlement payments due to the traffic  Some or all of them will start blocking the IPv8 traffic! So what do the customers do? Spend time and money to switch providers Simply return to IPv4 (more likely because none of us even know what IPv8 is!)

While many discuss the incremental deployment of their solutions, they address the technical but not economic issues of partial deployment… we look for what is missing from today’s architecture that would make evolution by its incumbent operations economically desirable. - Taken right from the paper What is the new architecture? What was addressed was: How the new architecture and why it will propagate and be successful!