On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 02:29:24PM -0800, Tony Hain wrote:
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
But that app has to be something particularly splendid. And in Europe at
least, NAT is not as prevalent as some think it is.
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.
Are you suggesting then, that all RFCs based on IPv6 should be... stopped?
By the sounds of it, what you're looking for is for us as a community to
refuse to deal with IPv4 any more, that we wash our hands of it, and make
vendors realise that they are going to be unable to support IPv4 for more
than a few years?
It's brutal, but I can see the point. Thinking about a cut-off date for IPv4
would indeed provoke some interesting discussion, but I think a lot of
people still want to hang onto IPv4. Even so, how does July 31st 2005 sound
to everybody?
--
Paul Robinson