On 16/12/2014 06:38, heasley wrote:
> Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 08:32:05AM +1300, Brian E Carpenter:
>> On 12/12/2014 18:12, heasley wrote:
>> ...
>>> I don't know anyone enchanted by v6.
>> Strange choice of word. I'm not in the least enchanted by IPv4
>> or by NAT44 either. I just know as a matter of fact that the
>> IPv4nternet ran out of addresses a while back and we have no
>> alternative but to fix it using IPv6. All the rest is details,
>> important details of course, but details.
>
> The point is that expanded address space is the only reason folks are
> driven to v6. The other protocol changes are not received as improvements
> and IMO have only served to further hinder adoption. These could have
> been omitted and by doing so, i argue that, adoption would be (have been)
> swifter.
That might be true, but of course we will never know. The opposite
might have been true too ("Why bother upgrading to 64 bit addresses
when we can just use double NAT and there is no other improvement?").
Brian
Bria