jra at baylink.com
Wed Apr 27 09:54:37 CDT 2011
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mikael Abrahamsson" <swmike at swm.pp.se>
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2011, Andrew Kirch wrote:
> > I'm not complaining, but I would point out that if these free brokers
> > are the public face of IPv6 for many hobbyists (and much of the various
> > software run on/over the internet is written by volunteers, and/or given
> > away for free), we aren't going to get there. The big deafening silence
> > from SIXXS is really unfortunate in that it does actively affect my
> > opinion of IPv6, my willingness to spend time implementing it, pestering
> > my upstream about it, or having my business give a damn about it.
> > Yes I know they're volunteers, but how much does that matter?
> So you would prefer that they shut down their service rather than
> provide current level of support?
That sounds like the argument he's making, and there's some credit that should
be given to it, yes. IPv6 is about, necessarily, to make the turn to being
a consumer service. Consumers are *much* less tolerant of shaky
implementations of new technologies that they can't see why they would need
anyway. I call your attention, for an example, to electronically-assisted
voting. There are half a dozen really good reasons why that would be A Good
Thing... but the commercially-inspired miserable first 2 or 3 implementations
of it have probably absorbed all of the public's tolerance of it for another
10 or 20 years.
More information about the NANOG