Noel,
Back in 1993 I predicted that what you have just stated is what us end
users will actually do in regards to IPv6 (which we called IPng back
then). I documented my thoughts in that regards in RFC 1687. RFC 1687 is
somewhat dated now, since the example of a "killer app" I selected is
rather "quaint" (to be generous), but the types of motivation underlying
that identification still persist.
In any case, I applaud your insight below that us end users will go to
great lengths to avoid any costly network upgrade that does not
contribute anything to our bottom line. Think about it: why would we
spend tens of millions of dollars to get equivalent network connectivity
to what we already have? It makes absolutely no sense from our
point-of-view.
--Eric
-----Original Message-----
From: Noel Chiappa [mailto:jnc(_at_)mercury(_dot_)lcs(_dot_)mit(_dot_)edu]
Sent: Monday, April 10, 2006 7:36 AM
To: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Cc: jnc(_at_)mercury(_dot_)lcs(_dot_)mit(_dot_)edu
Subject: Re: Reality (was RE: Stupid NAT tricks and how to stop them.)
> From: "Tony Hain" <alh-ietf(_at_)tndh(_dot_)net>
> The world needs the wake up call that reality is about to hit them
in
> the face and they will need all the time there is left to develop
a
> managed IPv6 deployment plan. If they don't start now they will be
> forced into a crash deployment when they try to get more space and
find
> out the pool had long ago run dry. The IETF as a whole needs to
wake up
> as well and stop developing for a dead end technology.
"The best laid plans o' mice an' men gang aft agley."
-- Robert Burns
"'Do not put too much faith in this hairy architecture you have
constructed', retorted Daemon Feature. 'All this is insignificant
compared to the Hack.'"
-- Mark Crispin, "Software Wars"
Many years ago now, a funny thing happened on the way to "complete
exhaustion of the IPv4 address space (Version 1)". Some clever people
worked out this ugly hack, which the marketplace judged - despite its
ugliness - to be a superior solution to the forklift upgrade to IPv6.
It's been selling like hot-cakes ever since, while IPv6 languished.
I've become rather disenchanted with my crystal ball, which seems quite
cloudy of late (if you'd told me, in 1986, we'd still be running a
Destination-Vector routing architecture for a routing table of this size
20 years later, I'd have *known* you were bonkers), so I have no
specific prediction to make, but...
Don't be surprised if the world, facing "complete exhaustion of the IPv4
address space (Version 2)" decides, yet again, that some sort of Plan B
is a better choice than a conversion to IPv6.
I have no idea exactly what it will be (maybe a free market in IPv4
addresses, plus layered NAT's, to name just one possibility), but there
are a lot of clever people out there, and *once events force them to
turn their attention to this particular alligator*, don't be surprised
if they don't come up with yet another workaround.
Noel
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf