There is no "suckerage" to V6. Really, it's not that hard. While CGN is the reality, we need to keep focused on the ultimate goal -- a single long term solution. Imagine a day where there is no dual stack, no IPv4, and no more band-aids. It will be amazing.
david. On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Joe Maimon <jmai...@ttec.com> wrote: > > > Lee Howard wrote: > >> You are welcome to deploy it if you choose to. >> Part of the reason I'm arguing against it is that if everyone deploys it, >> then everyone has to deploy it. If it is seen as an alternative to IPv6 >> by some, then others' deployment of IPv6 is made less useful: network >> effect. Also, spending money on CGN seems misguided; if you agree that >> you're going to deploy IPv6 anyway, why spend the money for IPv6 *and >> also* for CGN? >> >> >> Lee >> > > Suppose a provider fully deploys v6, they will still need CGN so long as > they have customers who want to access the v4 internet. > > Unfortunately, that may have the side effect of undercutting some portion of > v6's value proposition, inversely related to its suckage. > > Joe >