nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 Deployment
From: Fred Heutte <aoxomoxoa () sunlightdata com>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 17:27:37 -0700
This is more in the way of a leading question for those who are attending NANOG 40. I'll ask it the same way I did at NZNOG back in February -- what problem is it that IPv6 is actually supposed to solve? I used to know the answer to this, but I don't now. In 1997 (or even years before, reading Scott Bradner's eloquent advocacy for it back then) it would have been: address space, security, extensions, QOS. But it seems to me these have either been sidestepped, addressed somewhat, or the benefits have not overcome the costs in a clear business case sense. As I said -- my purpose in posing this is to stimulate discussion at Bellevue. It was the most interesting thing talked about at Palmerston North, at least until the cold beer arrived. fh
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 Deployment Fred Heutte (May 30)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment Randy Bush (May 30)
- Operators: the IETF's Dark Gods David W. Hankins (May 31)
- Re: Operators: the IETF's Dark Gods Roy (May 31)
- Operators: the IETF's Dark Gods David W. Hankins (May 31)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment Fred Baker (May 30)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment John Curran (May 30)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment Randy Bush (May 30)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment Randy Bush (May 30)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment Valdis . Kletnieks (May 30)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment John Curran (May 30)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment Randy Bush (May 30)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment Randy Bush (May 30)