> Owen DeLong wrote : > I know you don’t like that answer because for some reason, you prefer the > ongoing pain of IPv4 vs. the small short-term pain of deploying IPv6, but > there it is.
What you call short-term is 20 years and counting. I eliminated IPX in one year, and it was the #1 protocol at the time. For the last 20 years, I have heard that IPv6 would become the dominant protocol in 2 years. For the last TWENTY years. > I use more. Are you going to claim that my choice not to NAT is somehow > invalid? In an IPv4 world, yes. It's irresponsible. > You’ve admitted that there are valid reasons for at least 6 addresses per > household. No. This setup is a hodge-podge that has no reason to be. In all of my branches all across the USA, I use only one IP and the eight or sixteen that come automatically are wasted. Intentionally. > ISDN was quite widely deployed and, in fact, is still in widespread use, just > not for data for the most part. Oh ? where ? I did have a few PRIs at $job[-1], but there were local to my closet; the back end was SIP. For a variety of reasons, it was easier to communicate with legacy equipment with PRI trunks, but they came out of an Asterisk server; was a lot cheaper to buy a few Quad-PRI PCI express cards than upgrading a legacy system. Michel. _______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
