Home page logo

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

RE: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration
From: "Lee Howard" <lee () asgard org>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 16:31:07 -0500

From: Dobbins, Roland [mailto:rdobbins () arbor net]
On Nov 27, 2012, at 3:37 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:

If you don't think that the need to sustain the growth in the number of
devices attached to
the network (never mind the number of things causing that rate to
accelerate[1]) makes IPv6
inevitable at this point, you really aren't paying attention.

What people ought to do and what they actually do are often quite
different things.

Again, all the attention being lavished upon CGNs and 444 and whatnot are
quite interesting
indicators of perceived priorities.

A lot of attention was lavished on ISDN, too.  
More attention is lavished on IPv6.
So a) attention level doesn't indicate priority, and b) even if it did, IPv6
Also, CGN does not preclude IPv6; it makes most sense (if at all) as a
backstop for situations
when IPv6 doesn't work and IPv4 addresses are too expensive.


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]