Jon Allen Boone wrote:
...
Where is the incentive to move to IPv6 going to come from? All of
the Mac OS X and Linux machines I have at home support it. The core
infrastructure of the Internet has the ability to support it. But why
should we go to the trouble of enabling it? Where's the benefit?
Jon,
There is no doubt that the Internet has, as usual, routed around damage,
i.e. the objective shortage of IPv4 addresses for end users, but
unfortunately the work-around (ambiguous addresses and NATs) really
only works for a limited subset of applications, apparently including
those you use at home. There is a quite excellent article that describes the
gory details at:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/about/ac123/ac147/archived_issues/ipj_7-3/anatomy.html
For those who want to innovate, or for those countries whose ISPs are
already forced to run multiple levels of NAT, and in particular for
countries with on the order of a billion citizens, there simply isn't
any doubt that this mess cannot continue. It's a strategic issue, not
one that can be understood with our industry's traditional 3 month
forward look.
I too run behind a NAT when I have to. And I can run a few good old
fashioned client/server applications. But it isn't 10% of what I
could do on a real transparent Internet.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf