Le 8 oct. 2010 à 19:06, Phillip Hallam-Baker a écrit : > What if the key to IPv6 deployment is the realization that IPv6 can only be > deployed after we have solved the IPv4 address exhaustion problem?
IPv6 HAS ALREADY BEEN deployed where there was absolutely no address exhaustion problem. RFC 5569, at least its introduction, is useful reference material in this respect, to be read or re-read. The key is IMHO to keep things as simple as they can be in each particular context. Regards, RD > > On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 1:02 PM, james woodyatt <[email protected]> wrote: > everyone-- > > IPv6 may have been born with a developmental disability, but we're not > dealing with a corpse yet. The patient is still alive, getting better, and > with a bit of love and proper care, might yet grow up to make better and > brighter music than IPv4. > > Maybe I'm being overly sentimental and using anthropomorphism inappropriately > here, but really folks-- isn't it a bit unseemly to be arguing over how we > went so "wrong" with IPv6-- and how we could do ever so much better the > *next* time we get to reinvent the Internet if we avoid all the killing > mistakes we made in bringing IPv6 up-- while there are, today, more people > than ever before taking what are perceived to be enormous risks actually > making the v4->v6 transition start to happen? > > > -- > james woodyatt <[email protected]> > member of technical staff, communications engineering > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > > > > -- > Website: http://hallambaker.com/ > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
