You seem to have missed the point. Not only are we loosing existing
applications, there are untold new things that are not making it to market.
These new applications are unable to generate the critical mass they need to
make any marketing noise because the NAT rich environment is too difficult
for Joe-sixpack to deal with.
You will never hear a consumer demanding IPv6; that is technology plumbing.
The most they will demand is an app that only works because IPv6 provides
direct access between endpoint peers. You won't hear ISP's demanding IPv6
unless their customers are demanding apps that run over IPv6 (even then the
consumer is more likely to use an automated tunnel and make the clueless ISP
irrelevant). You won't get new apps unless the development community sees a
viable path to personal riches. You won't get the development community to
pay attention to the simplicity afforded by IPv6 until the IETF stops
wasting time trying to extend a dead protocol. Continuing work on IPv4 only
creates the illusion that it is a viable protocol for application developers
to rely on for future income.
Tony
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Robinson [mailto:paul(_at_)iconoplex(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk]
Sent: Monday, January 12, 2004 12:13 PM
To: Tony Hain
Cc: IETF(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Death of the Internet - details at 11
Tony Hain wrote:
While one aging application does not constitute 'the Internet', this
should
be taken as an early indicator of things that are happing, with more to
come.
http://www.fourmilab.ch/speakfree/eol/
Like it or not, the IETF must stop wasting time and effort building new
structures on a crumbling framework. A quick scan of the IESG document
queue
shows that the vast majority of the workload is still not seriously
focused
on making IPv6 the default protocol.
Methinks you doth protest too much.
The Internet is not dying. It's growing every day. However, both end-users
and yes, even service providers, are becoming exponentially stupid with
time. They neither understand the issues we believe to be important at a
technical level, nor do they care about understanding them anytime soon.
The modern Internet is run by marketing, not technical, requirements.
IPv6 will not take off any time soon because neither the end-user nor the
service provider sees the need. The moment AOL, Wanadoo, Tiscali, World
Online et al shout out "we *need* IPv6" it will happen. Quickly.
So, is it time for some serious lobbying, or do we wait until half the
applications out there suddenly stop working?
And out of curiosity, how many people here have migrated their entire
network to IPv6 already to set a good example and show how it's done? Yes,
thought so.
--
Paul Robinson