> From: David Morris [mailto:dwm@xxxxxxxxx] > On Fri, 9 Mar 2007, Nick Staff wrote: > > > I think the thing that would help IPv6 the most would be the setting > of a > > hard date when no new IPv4 addresses would be issued. This would > make it > > real for everyone and ignite the IPv6/IPv4 gateway market (I think). > Not to > > mention we'd never have to have another debate over when IPv4 was > going to > > run out which might be benefit enough in itself ;) > > What a lawsuit mess that would be ... artificial limits would never > work. I think the US FCC Digital Broadcast Deadline is a good example - though more drastic than I was suggesting. I think artificial limits are inevitable unless the intention is to support IPv4 until there's no one left in the world who wants to use it (and even that is an artificial limit). I also don't understand what is gained by a sliding doomsday other than procrastination, avoidance, and a neutered stimulus. I mean if IPv4 addresses are going to run out wouldn't it be better to know exactly when? In my opinion you make it real if you give it a date but until then it's like saying "smoking may cause cancer". If any smoker knew for a fact that the next drag on a cigarette would give them cancer they'd never smoke again. If a network manager knew that in 7 years all new address space would be IPv6 it would become a consideration from that point forward. In my opinion. Nick _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf