On Jun 12, 2011 6:18 PM, "Michel Py" <michel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> >> Michel Py wrote:
> >> If you were to remove 6to4 and 6RD from the
> >> picture, that would set us back 10 years
> >> ago in terms of IPv6 adoption.
>
> > Doug Barton wrote:
> > Can you explain the exact mechanism by which what you're
> > concerned about will occur? I don't see anything in the
> > draft which prevents an ISP from deploying 6rd.
>
> There is not. OTOH, I am not aware of any sizeable deployment of 6RD
> outside of AS12322; 6RD may not be for everyone, and what making 6to4
> historic may prevent is: someone else using 6to4, finding out that there
> are some issues, and coining another highly successful 6to4 variant that
> would fit their needs better.
>
The faint promise of yet another transition mechanism is hardly a motivation to keep 6to4 around.
The data (ripe ...) overwhelming proves default-on 6to4 clients + thinly deployed relays = unreliable ipv6 and ipv6 deployment obstacle.
Cb
> Michel.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@xxxxxxxx
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf