Re: IPv6 woes - RFC

[Joe Maimon <jmaimon () jmaimon com>]

Owen DeLong via NANOG wrote:
> > There are real issues with dual-stack, as this thread started out with.
> > I don't think there is a need neither to invent IPv6 problems, nor to
> > promote IPv6 advantages.  What we need is a way out of dual-stack-hell.
> I don’t disagree, but a reversion to IPv4-only certainly won’t do it.

For everyone who does have enough IPv4 addresses, it does. This is the 
problem in a nutshell. If that starts trending, IPv6 is done.

> I think the only way out is through.

I hope not, both for IPv6 sake and for the network users. We dont know 
how much longer the goal will take, there is materializing a real 
possibility we will never quite reach it, and the potholes on the way 
are pretty rough.

And as the trip winds on, the landscape is changing, not necessarily for 
the better.

One more "any decade now" and another IPv4 replacement/extension might 
just happen on the scene and catch on, rendering IPv6 the most wasteful 
global technical debacle to date.


>   Unfortunately, the IPv6 resistant forces
> are making that hard for everyone else.
>
> Owen

You say that as if it was a surprise, when it should not have been, and 
you say that as if something can be done about it, which we should know 
by now cannot be the primary focus, since it cannot be done in any 
timely fashion. If at all.

Its time to throw mud on the wall and see what sticks. Dual stack and 
wait is an ongoing failure slouching to disaster.

Joe