smd(_at_)ebone(_dot_)net (Sean Doran) writes:
Perry Metzger writes:
| Maybe because I hear from folks like you and others that you're
| ideologically opposed to deploying v6 instead of against it for
| technical reasons?
You have never heard this from me.
I have no doubt whatsoever that you have heard this from others
speaking about me. This probably includes your own inner voices.
Dunno. Some people at carriers are experimenting with it, some of them
seem to spend all their time being sarcastic and finding silly things
to say. Luckily, we no longer need your help.
IPv6 is architecturally flawed in precisely the same way as IPv4
is; it simply has 4x the number of binary digits in the address fields
and some minor cleanups which were important some years ago.
Sure. On the other hand, it has four times more bits in the address
field, and at the moment, we desperately need those bits. It is
costing us truly astronomical sums not to have those bits.
It does not solve the routing problem. It doesn't solve world hunger
either. And your point is?
(On the routing problem, the sad truth is that in spite of claims for
years by you and others, there are no magic solutions to the routing
problem. Blaming IPv6 for not incorporating the non-existent magic
solution is rather like blaming IPv6 for not incorporating the
non-existent magic cancer cure. I used to believe you and others who
made vague claims about various architectures, and then I spent some
time reading up on them, and I realized that none of them did
particularly better.)
.pm
--
Perry E. Metzger perry(_at_)wasabisystems(_dot_)com
--
Quality NetBSD CDs, Support & Service. http://www.wasabisystems.com/