paul at paulgraydon.co.uk
Tue Feb 1 14:27:45 CST 2011
On 02/01/2011 10:08 AM, david raistrick wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Feb 2011, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
>> What's the point of switching to IPv6 if it repeats all the IPv4
>> mistakes only with bigger addresses?
>> If you like NAT IPv4 is the place to be, it'll only get more and more.
> It's argument like this that has lead to this moment. Instead of
> discussing "how can the next generation addressing scheme support the
> needs of Internet consumers today and tomorrow" we tell people "if you
> don't like it, use v4"
> Guess what? We're still using v4.
We're still using v4 because we can, because there has been no
compelling business case to justify spending time on something that
isn't necessary just right now, especially given the not insignificant
changes between v4 and v6. There is nothing on line that isn't
accessible over IPv4 so there has been no critical app outside the
infrastructure to spur such changes yet either.
We can all sit here and say "Hey we're running out of addresses, we must
switch" but until we've run out you're not going to convince the large
majority of operators, who lets face it are traditionally lazy^W^W
cautious people , to do anything.
More information about the NANOG