----- Original Message ----
From: Masataka Ohta
<mohta(_at_)necom830(_dot_)hpcl(_dot_)titech(_dot_)ac(_dot_)jp>
To: trejrco(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 7:47:28 AM
Subject: Re: IPv6 standard?
trejrco(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com wrote:
Masataka - yes, you have voiced your e2e arguments - thank you for
your work.
Thank you for your acknowledgment that you can't voice against my
work.
We obviously disagree here, on a fundamental basis. I (and many
others) disagree that IPv6 'has failed' and are in fact
aggressively deploying it *right now*
It has been so for more than these 10 years. So, maybe, within next
100 years, IPv6 maybe fully deployed.
Why not set a flag date?
Setting the flag date together with Y2K would have solved this problem years
ago.
WRT aggregation, PI space excepted, there is an IPv6 advantage
- the allocations are large enough (the more bits part)
You obviously don't understand the fundamental problem against
route aggregation, which is multi-homing, against which large
allocation size is of no help.
Yes, GOSIP was a now-laughable effort ...
Thank you again for let us remember the true meaning of governmental
support.
But, IPv6 has been laughed at for more than 10 years.
Not sure how the late Itojun would have reacted to this remark.
--behcet
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf