V6 still not supported

Mark Delany k3f at november.emu.st
Thu Mar 24 11:44:52 UTC 2022

On 24Mar22, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) allegedly wrote:
> Hello Mark:
> > Any such "transition plan" whether "working" or "straightforward" is
> > logically impossible. Why anyone thinks such a mythical plan might yet be
> > formulated some 20+ years after deploying any of ipv6, ipv4++ or ipv6-lite is
> > absurd.
> This is dishonest

My point is that if there was a real transition plan it would have been invented and
executed by now and we'd all be on ipv6. Yet the reality is that here we are some 20 years
later with no plan and no ubiquitous ipv6. How is that observation dishonest?

> considering that I just proved on this very thread that such ideas existed

I don't know why you're conflating an idea with a plan - they are about as far away from
each other as is possible. Frankly no one cares about ideas, they're a dime a dozen.

A plan is an actionable, compelling and logical set of steps towards an end result. Do you
have such a thing for moving everyone on the planet to ipv6?

Here's a simple test of whether you have a plan or not. I'm connected via my legacy ipv4
ISP router completely oblivous to ipv6. How does your plan incentivise me to upgrade my
router to support ipv6?

When you have an answer to that, you might have a glimmer of a plan.


More information about the NANOG mailing list