Le 8 oct. 2010 à 19:02, james woodyatt a écrit :
everyone--
IPv6 may have been born with a developmental disability, but we're not
dealing with a corpse yet. The patient is still alive, getting better, and
with a bit of love and proper care, might yet grow up to make better and
brighter music than IPv4.
Maybe I'm being overly sentimental and using anthropomorphism inappropriately
here, but really folks
-- isn't it a bit unseemly to be arguing over how we went so "wrong" with
IPv6--
100% agreement
It's time to use all what already works.
It's also time to complete what already works with pieces that miss to quickly
extend IPv6 use to more configurations.
and how we could do ever so much better the *next* time we get to reinvent
the Internet if we avoid all the killing mistakes we made in bringing IPv6
up--
while there are, today, more people than ever before taking what are
perceived to be enormous risks actually making the v4->v6 transition start to
happen?
It should be largely advertised that, v4->v6 transition HAS started
(fortunately, not everybody is lagging behind):
- Since 2008, many users whose service providers offer IPv6 automatically
access Google servers in IPv6.
- For the still numerous applications that are reachable only in IPv4, they
didn't lose any IPv4 connectivity.
- No NATs being traversed in IPv6, Google applications that use many parallel
TCP connections have no risk, for these users, to encounter any port shortage
in any traversed NAT.
Kind regards,
RD
--
james woodyatt <jhw(_at_)apple(_dot_)com>
member of technical staff, communications engineering
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf