who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?]

Tue Nov 30 03:31:08 UTC 2004

>
> But old-style tcp apps don't work with ipv6 either.  So if you're going
> to demand binary compatibility, all the mechanics need to get done below
> the app anyway.
>
Actually, on some systems, the appear to work just fine, or, at least the
authors have already coded v6 support in.  In an ideal world, yes, the app.
shouldn't have to know anything below layer 4.

> It would have been nice to make sctp be the standard stream protocol for
> ipv6.  For most nanog customers, there's still time.  Those places that
> have already seen significant ipv6 adoption may need to upgrade again.
> If we wait much longer, of course, the opportunity will be lost.  To
> argue that it's already too late, when ipv6 is a small fraction of all
> traffic and an infinitesmal fraction of future traffic is, imho, foolish.

May not be too late, but, doesn't appear to be catching on well enough to
prevent it.

Owen
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20041129/6b433486/attachment.sig>