IPv6 should have a solid mention within this document - so that it is in-line with other USG documents

IN 2016 the OMB issued a memorandum [M-17-06](https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/memoranda/2017/m-17-06.pdf) which in-part addressed the need to support IPv6 within the US Federal Government. I quote:

> **17. Transition to Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6)**
> Agencies must remain up to date with major technical changes in internet protocol.
> A. Agencies are already required to upgrade public/external facing servers and services to use native IPv6.40
> B. Agencies must also ensure that their procurements of networked information technology comply with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) requirements41 for use of the U.S. Government IPv6 Profile and Test Program for the completeness and quality of their IPv6 capabilities.42

This was just another step in the USG's continued push to provide the transition towards IPv6 within all its Internet-related efforts. See [issue 11](https://github.com/GSA/modernization/issues/11) for @CPUHogg's excellent review of earlier work.

Sadly, the [Report to the President on Federal IT Modernization](https://itmodernization.cio.gov/) as it stands today fails to mention IPv6. This is a major oversight.

While [Appendix A](https://itmodernization.cio.gov/report/appendices/data-level-protections/) and [Appendix B](https://itmodernization.cio.gov/report/appendices/cloud-security-protections/) are written with very generic language, it should be noted that failing to mention the importance of IPv6 with any modernization document is a serious mistake. There is a proven need to continuously push the subject of IPv6 within all network-related documents.

Only by having IPv6 front-and-center within everyone's mindset we will have the required progress within this area. The commercial world (both mobile, broadband, cloud, and hardware vendors) have all embraced IPv6 after many many years of pushing within the collective industry. A similar effort could be addressed with the [Shared Services to Enable Future Network Architectures](https://itmodernization.cio.gov/report/shared-services/) section of this report.

Failing to mention IPv6 within this report will seriously dilute existing USG IPv6 efforts.

Yours,

Martin J. Levy
Network Strategy
[Cloudflare, Inc.](https://cloudflare.com/)
San Francisco, CA