What if the key to IPv6 deployment is the realization that IPv6 can only be
deployed after we have solved the IPv4 address exhaustion problem?
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 1:02 PM, james woodyatt <jhw(_at_)apple(_dot_)com> wrote:
everyone--
IPv6 may have been born with a developmental disability, but we're not
dealing with a corpse yet. The patient is still alive, getting better, and
with a bit of love and proper care, might yet grow up to make better and
brighter music than IPv4.
Maybe I'm being overly sentimental and using anthropomorphism
inappropriately here, but really folks-- isn't it a bit unseemly to be
arguing over how we went so "wrong" with IPv6-- and how we could do ever so
much better the *next* time we get to reinvent the Internet if we avoid all
the killing mistakes we made in bringing IPv6 up-- while there are, today,
more people than ever before taking what are perceived to be enormous risks
actually making the v4->v6 transition start to happen?
--
james woodyatt <jhw(_at_)apple(_dot_)com>
member of technical staff, communications engineering
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
--
Website: http://hallambaker.com/
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf