+1 On 10/8/10 1:02 PM, "james woodyatt" <jhw@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >everyone-- > >IPv6 may have been born with a developmental disability, but we're not >dealing with a corpse yet. The patient is still alive, getting better, >and with a bit of love and proper care, might yet grow up to make better >and brighter music than IPv4. > >Maybe I'm being overly sentimental and using anthropomorphism >inappropriately here, but really folks-- isn't it a bit unseemly to be >arguing over how we went so "wrong" with IPv6-- and how we could do ever >so much better the *next* time we get to reinvent the Internet if we >avoid all the killing mistakes we made in bringing IPv6 up-- while there >are, today, more people than ever before taking what are perceived to be >enormous risks actually making the v4->v6 transition start to happen? > > >-- >james woodyatt <jhw@xxxxxxxxx> >member of technical staff, communications engineering > > >_______________________________________________ >Ietf mailing list >Ietf@xxxxxxxx >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf