On 11/17/2004 9:02 PM, Paul Vixie wrote:
therefore after a middle state of perhaps five more years
How long have folks been predicting ~5yr windows?
Not to diminish your table or anything, but markets don't work in binary,
and the problem has been with access more than anything else. Usually we
see adoption go through big-org to small-org to consumer [according to
price and availability], but as of right now there are still very few
big-orgs interested in it, and almost no early adopters in the small-org
and individual sectors [even though IPv4 has been "unavailable" to them
for many years now]. Demand is not driving adoption, because there is no
demand. From all evidence. it actually looks like people would prefer to
reinvent IPv4 connectivity as the first choice. no matter how much
friction you put on it with allocation rules and whiatnot.
This is not primarily a technology problem, and more about figuring ways
to convince ~Linksys that their SOHO products need to support IPv6, and
also convincing ~Comcast to provide the addresses. Why do they not
already? Too much support cost probably, given the limited pool of
early-adopter technologists. Okay then, how do we help get the costs
lower? Rinse and repeat.
Five years would be reasonable if we were actually starting on these kinds
of efforts today. Not starting means that it will always be five years out
of reach.
--
Eric A. Hall http://www.ehsco.com/
Internet Core Protocols http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf