Interesting angle here ;-)
> The ISPs are keeping the cheese to themselves.
But, the current kind of cheese is running out, and is a little "stinky" in ways. The new kind of cheese is very abundant, but unfortunately comes at an opportunity cost to get to it from here.
Looking at this from game theory angle, looks like a setup for a long period of holdoff (protect interests) followed by a massive and rapid flood to the other camp (fight for the new pie ... er ... cheese). (caveat, armchair game theorist ;-)
-- Peter
| Tim Chown <tjc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
15.03.07 10:53 |
To: ietf@xxxxxxxx cc: Subject: Re: Game theory and IPv4 to IPv6 |
On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 07:37:26AM -0700, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
> The problem is that until IPv6 has critical mass it is much better to be on IPv4 than IPv6.
>
> If there are any grad students reading the list take a look at the game theory literature and apply it to the transition. Assume that it's a rat-choice world and that each actor follows their best interest.
>
> An actor can be in one of several states:
>
> Unconnected
> IPv4 connected with own address
> IPv4-NAT connected with NAT address
> IPv4/IPv6 connected Dual stack
> IPv4-NAT/IPv6 connected Dual stack
> IPv6 connected
Unfortunately most of the rats cannot choose certain states, so the game
is fundamentally flawed. The ISPs are keeping the cheese to themselves.
Squeak.
--
Tim
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf