On 12/3/2014 9:04 AM, Bob Hinden wrote:
Hi,
I do not support this action. The words in the abstract in RFC6346:
We are facing the exhaustion of the IANA IPv4 free IP address pool.
Unfortunately, IPv6 is not yet deployed widely enough to fully
replace IPv4, and it is unrealistic to expect that this is going to
change before the depletion of IPv4 addresses. Letting hosts
seamlessly communicate in an IPv4 world without assigning a unique
globally routable IPv4 address to each of them is a challenging
problem.
are not accurate. Noting one of many statistics that IPv6 use is
growing, Google is reporting that 5% of their access traffic is from
IPv6:
So, after 25 years of effort, we've achieved 5% penetration. Wow.
And that's for a single, special service provider.
And while yes, the more recent adoption rate is considerably more
promising that that statistic implies, it leaves a basic question:
According to what operational model does 5% adoption counter a
claim that "IPv6 is not yet deployed widely enough to fully replace IPv4"?
What are the current projections for at least 60% penetrations? And is
even that sufficient for claiming that IPv6 sufficiently counter the
above text about IPv4?
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net