swmike at swm.pp.se
Mon Sep 17 05:41:16 UTC 2012
On Mon, 17 Sep 2012, Randy Bush wrote:
>> So I agree with you that there is still a risk that this is going to
>> get screwed up, but I don't feel too gloomy yet.
> yep. but we dis some wisp hacker for saying so. not cool.
I have to admit I never read the forum text so I don't know exactly what
was said. I don't see IPv6 getting screwed up the next 50-100 years (even
humanity as it is can't be THAT wreckless?), so not adopting IPv6 and
clinging to IPv4 for that reason is hard to understand from my point of
We know IPv4 isn't enough for our needs, IPv6 might not be the "forever"
solution, but it surely scales a lot better than IPv4.
Otoh if I ran a low-cost operations on a shoestring budget I probably
wouldn't be adopting IPv6 right now anyway, but for other reasons than
IPv6 being "not scalable".
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike at swm.pp.se
More information about the NANOG