So the rational choice actors here are the ISPs not the end-users. Build that constraint into the model.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Tim Chown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 10:53 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Game theory and IPv4 to IPv6 > > On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 07:37:26AM -0700, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote: > > The problem is that until IPv6 has critical mass it is much > better to be on IPv4 than IPv6. > > > > If there are any grad students reading the list take a look > at the game theory literature and apply it to the transition. > Assume that it's a rat-choice world and that each actor > follows their best interest. > > > > An actor can be in one of several states: > > > > Unconnected > > IPv4 connected with own address > > IPv4-NAT connected with NAT address > > IPv4/IPv6 connected Dual stack > > IPv4-NAT/IPv6 connected Dual stack > > IPv6 connected > > Unfortunately most of the rats cannot choose certain states, > so the game > is fundamentally flawed. The ISPs are keeping the cheese to > themselves. > > Squeak. > > -- > Tim > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > [email protected] > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
