On 10/1/2017 12:30 AM, John Levine wrote:
The bit about not adding anything to IPv4 unless we also add it to
IPv6 is OK, but I also can't find much merit in the rest of the
document.
Well said.
I think the implication is that this document should not advance in its
current form.
We will continue to service the installed base of IPv4 with enhancements
as long as there is demand for such enhancements. Anyone who thinks
otherwise is just burying their heads in the sand. I don't mind if
people want to bury their heads in the sand, but if they could do it
without wasting everyone else's time, that would be nice.
On 10/2/2017 4:29 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
That's easy - the existence of available addresses is compelling
advantage enough:-)
Obviously if that were the case, we wouldn't even be having this
discussion, because IPv4 would already be gone.