A straightforward transition plan (was: Re: V6 still not supported)
jcurran at istaff.org
Thu Jan 12 00:20:35 UTC 2023
Full agreement - nicely said.
P.s disclaimer: my views alone - do not eat packet.
> On Jan 11, 2023, at 7:10 PM, Randy Bush <randy at psg.com> wrote:
>> It was assumed that IPng would include a standard straightforward
>> technological solution to support communication with IPv4 hosts – this
>> was a defined hard requirement.
>> This transition mechanism wasn’t available at the time of the
>> selection of IPng, and instead was left as a future deliverable.
> three of the promises of ipng which ipv6 did not deliver
> o compatibility/transition,
> o security, and
> o routing & renumbering
> the real goal of those who made the ipv6 decision was to stop the press
> from screaming about the end of the internet. in this they succeeded.
> and the ops community has paid an insane penalty ere since.
More information about the NANOG