V6 still not supported

Michael Thomas mike at mtcc.com
Wed Mar 23 17:21:15 UTC 2022

On 3/23/22 10:04 AM, Joe Maimon wrote:
> Michael Thomas wrote:
>> On 3/22/22 10:34 PM, Joe Maimon wrote:
>>>> There is this other side: I'm dualstack, and I simply dont notice.
>>> Being in transition state indefinitely is not success.
>>> The other side is when you are v6 only and you dont notice. We arent 
>>> there yet. Thats the failure.
>> This is a terrible way to look at things. SIP has been gradually been 
>> taking over the PSTN signaling for 20 years. It has not rooted out 
>> every SS7 installation on the planet and probably won't until I'm 
>> long dead. Is that a failure? It's certainly a "transition state". 
>> After not paying attention for probably a decade and seeing how much 
>> it's penetrated I'd call that a resounding success. The same is true 
>> of IPv6 with all of the mobile uptake. Legacy is hard. It always has 
>> been hard. Calling something a failure because it doesn't instantly 
>> defeat legacy a terrible take. It was always going to be difficult to 
>> add address space to IP regardless of how it was done. All of the 
>> bagging on IPv6 and imagining a better ipng ignores that basic fact.
>> Mike
> SIP wasnt formulated to save telephony. In fact sip has nearly 100% 
> adoption for ip based telephony. It did displace legacy and 
> proprietary protocols.
> There is no comparison. IPv6 transition was intended to complete 
> before run out using Dual Stack. Fail.
SIP won't displace all legacy PSTN any time soon. So it's a failure by 
your definition. And by your definition IPv6 was a failure before it was 
even born because the internet became popular -- something I'll add that 
nobody knew for certain when it was being designed. There's a lot of 
sour grapes about stuff that happened 30 years ago.


More information about the NANOG mailing list