> From: Cameron Byrne <cb.list6@xxxxxxxxx>
> The data (ripe ...) overwhelming proves default-on 6to4 clients +
> thinly deployed relays = unreliable ipv6 and ipv6 deployment obstacle.
And how is making the protocol historic going to affect broken stuff that's
already been deployed (which is what is causing those observed problems) - or,
to put it more precisely, how is changing the protocol's label going to have
_more_ effect (i.e. above and beyond) than putting out a document which says
'here are some problems with using this, don't use this unless you know what
you're doing'?
> I believe there is data to show this time is different (iana and apnic
> are exhausted, successful v6day, docsis 3.0 and LTE deployment ...
I am personally dubious, since although technically we're now formally out of
space, I suspect we're just going to transition from a period in which it was
somewhat difficult to get IPv4 space [convincing an RIR you needed it] to
more difficult [acquiring space from a current holder] - that is, for those
organizations which don't already have space stockpiled. And that, along with
somewhat greater use of NAT - which has, of course, been keeping the Internet
functional for well over a decade) - will be the approach the market prefers.
We'll see, though, won't we?
Noel
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf