Venue question: Is this the right place to discuss marketing techniques?
On 6/24/14 6:05 PM, "Martin Rex" <mrex(_at_)sap(_dot_)com> wrote:
A lot of the equipment that me and my family is using is not IPv6 capable,
and *ALL* Software that I've used so far (Linux, WinXP, Win7) runs
***MUCH*** better when configured with IPv4-only anyway, so why bother.
You know that WinXP is end of support, right?
I haven't seen data showing dual-stack to be in any way inferior to
IPv4-only.
If you have some, please forward.
I have seen data showing IPv6 latency is lower.
If someone needs to be pushed, then it is *VENDORS*, not users,
that they ship their equipment in a fashion that it will work with IPv6,
should this ever become available. Then maybe in 10 years from now,
this might become interesting to end users.
I believe it was Joe St. Sauver who said:
Consumers don't care about plumbing, they want water.
Whether the water comes over cast iron, copper, or PVC only matters to
the plumbers.
In my humble opinion, it is too late to argue about whether IPv6 will be
deployed. It is.
We can argue about where there are gaps, and whether IPv6 will be
universal enough (and "enough for what?", and how to sunset IPv4 (q.v.),
and how to avoid or improve NATs. We could argue about whether IETF
should keep updating IPv4 and working around NAT
(draft-george-ipv6-support).
And of course, we each 2119-SHOULD deploy IPv6 as universally as possible.
Lee