In message
<20030403115418(_dot_)1681dd9f(_dot_)moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu>, Keith
Moore writes:
Then there's the problem that when a 800-pound gorilla ships code,
that code largely defines expectations for what will and will not
work in practice- often moreso than the standards themselves.
Strange as I feel defending Microsoft, I actually think it's
commendable that they implemented IPv6 at all; it's not as if there's
a lot of market demand for it yet.
I'm certainly glad that they've done so; however most of their
competitors are shipping v6 also, and some have been doing so for
considerably longer than MS. About the only major vendor that isn't
shipping v6 seems to be Palm (shame on them!).
Keith, I can't get upset about Microsoft declining to ship
poorly-tested code. Given how many security holes are due to buggy,
poorly-tested programs, I applaud anyone who takes that seriously.
--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb (me)
http://www.wilyhacker.com (2nd edition of "Firewalls" book)