----- Original Message ----
> From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: trejrco@xxxxxxxxx
> Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx
> Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 7:47:28 AM
> Subject: Re: IPv6 standard?
>
> trejrco@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> > Masataka - yes, you have voiced your e2e arguments - thank you for
> > your work.
>
> Thank you for your acknowledgment that you can't voice against my
> work.
>
> > We obviously disagree here, on a fundamental basis. I (and many
> > others) disagree that IPv6 'has failed' and are in fact
> > aggressively deploying it *right now*
>
> It has been so for more than these 10 years. So, maybe, within next
> 100 years, IPv6 maybe fully deployed.
Why not set a flag date?
Setting the flag date together with Y2K would have solved this problem years ago.
>
> > WRT aggregation, PI space excepted, there is an IPv6 advantage
> > - the allocations are large enough (the more bits part)
>
> You obviously don't understand the fundamental problem against
> route aggregation, which is multi-homing, against which large
> allocation size is of no help.
>
> > Yes, GOSIP was a now-laughable effort ...
>
> Thank you again for let us remember the true meaning of governmental
> support.
>
> But, IPv6 has been laughed at for more than 10 years.
>
Not sure how the late Itojun would have reacted to this remark.
--behcet
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf