nanog mailing list archives
Re: Nat
From: Baldur Norddahl <baldur.norddahl () gmail com>
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2015 21:34:26 +0100
On 19 December 2015 at 15:49, Jeff McAdams <jeffm () iglou com> wrote:
It's far past time to worry about architectural purity. We need people deploying IPv6 *NOW*, and it needs to be the job of the IETF, at this point, to fix the problems that are causing people not to deploy.
If you want to deploy IPv6 NOW you will do it with the tools available NOW. There might be use cases with a real problem, but usually the problem is at layer 8/9. We had our share of difficulty with deploying IPv6, but the problems were in the implementations not the standards. I think it is naive to believe some people would deploy IPv6 if it was just a bit more like IPv4. No, they still would ignore it. Because the real reason was never anything to do with IPv6, but simply that they do not see any reason to do it. If these people wanted to do it, they would do it. Instead they make up excuses. You are wasting your time if you try to adapt to made up excuses. Regards, Baldur
Current thread:
- Re: Nat, (continued)
- Re: Nat Baldur Norddahl (Dec 19)
- Re: Nat Matthew Newton (Dec 21)
- Re: Nat A . L . M . Buxey (Dec 21)
- Re: Nat Matthew Petach (Dec 19)
- Re: Nat James R Cutler (Dec 19)
- Re: Nat Nick Hilliard (Dec 19)
- Message not available
- Re: Nat Lee Howard (Dec 18)
- Message not available
- Re: Nat Larry Sheldon (Dec 16)
- Re: Nat Randy Bush (Dec 16)
- Re: Nat Daniel Corbe (Dec 20)