On 7/31/12 8:27 AM, "Michael Thomas" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> It may yield no benefit except to shake out bugs at customer sites. >> If so, it would increase support costs for the provider. >> >> Grandma's Windows98 machine needs an IPv4 address and without it she >> can't fetch recipes and read occasional email and run bots in the >> background. :-) >> > >To be fair, I think some of the new features being contemplated >here both require ipv6, and would be potentially beneficial without >requiring global v6 connectivity. But shaking out bugs -- and getting >people used to ipv6 -- isn't a Bad Thing, IMO. The more old hat and >normal v6 usage is, the less frightening it will be for ISP's to roll out, >right? No. I don't want to shake out bugs in consumers' homes. Let's say we did this, and Grandma's machine had a problem. Who is supposed to troubleshoot that problem, identify it as IPv6-related, and submit a bug report? ISPs are rolling out IPv6. There is nothing to be gained by breaking consumer networks before they have IPv6 access. Let early adopters find and squish bugs. Lee This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout. _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
