On Jul 6, 2005, at 7:57 AM, Scott McGrath wrote:
IPv6 would have been adopted much sooner if the protocol had been
written
as an extension of IPv4 and in this case it could have slid in
under the
accounting departments radar since new equipment and applications
would
not be needed.
IPv6 would have been adopted much sooner if it had solved a problem
that caused significant numbers of end users or large scale ISPs real
pain. If IPv6 had actually addressed one or more of routing
scalability, multi-homing, or transparent renumbering all the hand
wringing about how the Asians and Europeans are going to overtake the
US would not occur. Instead, IPv6 dealt with a problem that, for the
most part, does not immediately affect the US market but which
(arguably) does affect the other regions. I guess you can, if you
like, blame it on the accountants...
Rgds,
-drc
