Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On 10/03/2015 08:40 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: > So a /48 isn’t about being able to support 295,147,905,179,352,825,856 > devices in every home, it’s about being able to have 16 bits of subnet mask > to use in delegating addresses in a dynamic plug-and-play hierarchical > topology that can evolve

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

In message <56157950.5040...@lugosys.com>, "Israel G. Lugo" writes: > > On 10/03/2015 08:40 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: > > So a /48 isn’t about being able to support 295,147,905,179,352,825,856 > > devic > es in every home, it’s about being able to have 16 bits of subnet mask to > use > in

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

> (IPv6 ONLY insisting on manufacturers implementing 464XLAT is inferior > in every way to dual stack, There is one way it is superior; it rewards web and other content sites that implement IPv6. Unlike dual stack, it applies pressure where it is needed, on the IPv4-only sites. Grottiness can

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

--- > From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mark Andrews > Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 6:01 PM > To: Matthew Newton <m...@leicester.ac.uk> > Cc: nanog@nanog.org > Subject: Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption > > > In message <2015100123261

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

get too lost in the weeds when they start focusing on device >> support, home router support, user knowledge, etc. Just get it working to >> the people and we can figure out the rest later. >> >> >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: NANO

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

This still would have required updating every application, host, router, everything. Just as much work as deploying IPv6 without many of the benefits. No thanks, Owen > On Oct 2, 2015, at 14:18 , William Herrin wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Fred Baker (fred)

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

> On Oct 2, 2015, at 13:45 , Todd Underwood wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: >> >> None of them does what you propose — Smooth seamless communication between >> an IPv4-only host and an IPv6-only host. > > i view this

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

gt; > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org <javascript:;>] On Behalf > Of Mark Andrews > > Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 6:01 PM > > To: Matthew Newton <m...@leicester.ac.uk <java

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

. >> >> >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mark Andrews >> Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 6:01 PM >> To: Matthew Newton <m...@leicester.ac.uk> >> Cc: nanog@nanog.org >> S

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On Sat, Oct 3, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: > So the problem you are suggesting we focus on is mostly a solved problem. > Content Providers are progressing, modulo some serious laggards, notably > Amazon and a few others. > > newly released IOS9 and OSX El Capitan add

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

--- ma...@isc.org wrote: From: Mark Andrews :: Lots of homes don't even know they are running :: IPv6 in parallel with IPv4. It is usually a :: non-event. -- That's for sure. I have been focusing a lot on work lately instead of my

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

You make a point, but those ipv6 addresses would not be a available to my cpe. I would agree that if your cpe is less than 5 years old, it should support ipv6. On October 2, 2015 12:30:56 AM ADT, Mark Andrews wrote: > >In message

RE: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

it working to the people and we can figure out the rest later. -Original Message- From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mark Andrews Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 6:01 PM To: Matthew Newton <m...@leicester.ac.uk> Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: How to force

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 05:58:59PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote: > Still, Todd, ignoring the other parts, the least you can do is > answer this simple question: > > How would you implement a 128-bit address that is backwards > compatible with existing IPv4 hosts requiring no software > modification

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 8:54 PM, Hugo Slabbert wrote: > On Thu 2015-Oct-01 18:28:52 -0700, Damian Menscher via NANOG < > nanog@nanog.org> wrote: > >> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 4:26 PM, Matthew Newton >> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 10:42:57PM +,

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

Why would they go "IPv6 only" if it costs them huge customer bases? *** anecdote below *** I hosted a discussion about IPv6 the other day to a room full of highly technically-proficient millennials (being maybe in the older portion of "millennial", myself - In spite of how I must sound, I'm

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

nowledge, etc. Just get it > working to the people and we can figure out the rest later. > > > > > -Original Message- > From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mark Andrews > Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 6:01 PM > To: Matthew Newton <m...@leicester.a

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

ctober 01, 2015 6:01 PM > To: Matthew Newton <m...@leicester.ac.uk> > Cc: nanog@nanog.org > Subject: Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption > > > In message <20151001232613.gd123...@rootmail.cc.le.ac.uk>, Matthew Newton > writes: > > Additionally it is now a OL

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On 10/2/15, 10:48 AM, "NANOG on behalf of Cryptographrix" wrote: >For ISPs that already exist, what benefit do they get from >providing/allowing IPv6 transit to their customers? If they'd like to continue growing at something above

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On 1 October 2015 at 16:12, Peter Beckman wrote: > Then the teacher said "The toothpaste is the Internet. Once it's deployed, > it is nearly impossible to put it back the way it was."* > > Beckman > > * OK, the teacher said "The toothpaste are your words. Once they come out,

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On 10/02/2015 07:27 AM, Steve Mikulasik wrote: I think people get too lost in the weeds when they start focusing on device support, home router support, user knowledge, etc. Just get it working to the people and we can figure out the rest later. The reality is that if customers can get it

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

My apologies; missed the anchor for some reason and just got the top bits of the doc. -- Hugo h...@slabnet.com: email, xmpp/jabber also on TextSecure & RedPhone From: Damian Menscher -- Sent: 2015-10-02 - 08:45 > On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 8:54 PM, Hugo Slabbert

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

Unfortunately, the files at the NANOG links you posted are not available, but I think I get the premise of them from their summaries and what you're trying to say - thank you for linking. The discussion about CGN maintenance versus IPv6 adoption is important at the NANOG level because of exactly

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

t later. > > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mark > > Andrews Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 6:01 PM > > To: Matthew Newton <m...@leicester.ac.uk> > > Cc: nanog@

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

Hardware upgrades aren’t difficulty inherent in the protocol. Sure, everyone has to upgrade their hardware sometimes. Whether it’s to get IPv6 capable hardware or to address some other need, periodic hardware upgrades are a simple fact of life. However, if TW put up IPv6 tomorrow as

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

> On Oct 1, 2015, at 18:37 , Todd Underwood wrote: > > Either there are multiple translation systems that exist that were invented > late or there are not. Either Owen has never heard of any of them or he is > trolling. > > There are multiple translation systems and

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

gt;" <nanog@nanog.org<mailto:nanog@nanog.org>> Subject: Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption Unfortunately, the files at the NANOG links you posted are not available, but I think I get the premise of them from their summaries and what you're trying to say - thank you for linking. WG]

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: > > None of them does what you propose — Smooth seamless communication between > an IPv4-only host and an IPv6-only host. i view this point/question as an assertion by owen as follows: "it was never possible to design a smooth

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

that's crazy. why would you want a simple way to boostrap more addresses from what we have now? you'll never make yourself into an internationally known ipvNEXT advocate with engineering like that. more advocacy. less engineering! t On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 5:18 PM, William Herrin

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Fred Baker (fred) wrote: > There's no way to change the IPv4 address to be larger http://bill.herrin.us/network/ipxl.html There's always a way. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin her...@dirtside.com b...@herrin.us

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

> On Oct 2, 2015, at 2:18 PM, William Herrin wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Fred Baker (fred) wrote: >> There's no way to change the IPv4 address to be larger > > http://bill.herrin.us/network/ipxl.html > > There's always a way. > > Regards, >

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On Fri 2015-Oct-02 09:43:40 -0700, Hugo Slabbert wrote: My apologies; missed the anchor for some reason and just got the top bits of the doc. -- Hugo h...@slabnet.com: email, xmpp/jabber also on TextSecure & RedPhone From: Damian Menscher -- Sent:

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

> On Oct 1, 2015, at 3:42 PM, Todd Underwood wrote: > > it's just a new addressing protocol that happens to not work with the rest > of the internet. it's unfortunate that we made that mistake I understand the comment, but I see some issues with it. The problem isn't that

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

Why are some people here asserting that IPv6 failed when it looks like it is actually taking off pretty good right now? https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html Jan 2013 about 1% Jan 2014 about 2.5% Jan 2015 about 5% It is already past 9% so we will be at least at 10% by Jan 2016.

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

In message <560e9a20.7090...@satchell.net>, Stephen Satchell writes: > On 10/02/2015 07:27 AM, Steve Mikulasik wrote: > > I think people get too lost in the weeds when they start focusing on > > device support, home router support, user knowledge, etc. Just get it > > working to the people and we

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On 02/10/2015 04:52, Curtis Maurand wrote: If Time Warner (my ISP) put up IPv6 tomorrow, my firewall would no longer work. I could put up a pfsnse or vyatta box pretty quickly, but my off the shelf Cisco/Linksys home router has no ipv6 support hence the need to replace the hardware.

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On Fri, 02 Oct 2015 00:16:50 -, Todd Underwood said: > yes. huh. funny about that, right? what do you think accounts for that? > *why* do you think that *17* *years* later people are still just barely > using this thing. The fact that dumping too much CO2 into the atmosphere is a Bad

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On Friday, October 2, 2015, Baldur Norddahl wrote: > Why are some people here asserting that IPv6 failed when it looks like it > is actually taking off pretty good right now? > > https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html > > Jan 2013 about 1% > Jan 2014 about

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

>> None of them does what you propose — Smooth seamless communication between >> an IPv4-only host and an IPv6-only host. > > i view this point/question as an assertion by owen as follows: > > "it was never possible to design a smooth transition and that's why we > gave up on it." > >

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On 1 October 2015 at 03:26, Mark Andrews wrote: > Windows XP does IPv6 fine so long as there is a IPv4 recursive > server available. It's just a simple command to install IPv6. > > netsh interface ipv6 install > If the customer knew how to do that he wouldn't still be

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

> On Oct 1, 2015, at 00:39 , Baldur Norddahl wrote: > > On 1 October 2015 at 03:26, Mark Andrews wrote: > >> Windows XP does IPv6 fine so long as there is a IPv4 recursive >> server available. It's just a simple command to install IPv6. >> >>

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On 10/1/2015 2:29 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: On Oct 1, 2015, at 00:39 , Baldur Norddahl wrote: On 1 October 2015 at 03:26, Mark Andrews wrote: Windows XP does IPv6 fine so long as there is a IPv4 recursive server available. It's just a simple command

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

> On Oct 1, 2015, at 12:06 , Curtis Maurand wrote: > > > > On 10/1/2015 2:29 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: >>> On Oct 1, 2015, at 00:39 , Baldur Norddahl >>> wrote: >>> >>> On 1 October 2015 at 03:26, Mark Andrews wrote: >>>

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On 2015-10-01 20:29, Owen DeLong wrote: However, I think eventually the residential ISPs are going to start charging extra for IPv4 service. ISP's will not charge too much. With too expensive IPv4 many customers will migrate from v4/dual stack to v6-only and ISP's will be left with unused

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

That reminds me of a story. Once a teacher gave each of his students a tube of toothpaste. He said "Squeeze all of the toothpaste out of the tube on to your desk." The kids laughed and did it, making a giant mess and having a ball. When things settled down, the teacher said "Now put all of the

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 10:42:57PM +, Todd Underwood wrote: > it's just a new addressing protocol that happens to not work with the rest > of the internet. it's unfortunate that we made that mistake, but i guess > we're stuck with that now (i wish i could say something about lessons > learned

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

> On Oct 1, 2015, at 13:55 , Grzegorz Janoszka wrote: > > On 2015-10-01 20:29, Owen DeLong wrote: >> However, I think eventually the residential ISPs are going to start charging >> extra >> for IPv4 service. > > ISP's will not charge too much. With too expensive IPv4

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On 29 September 2015 at 13:37, David Hubbard wrote: > Had an idea the other day; we just need someone with a lot of cash > (google, apple, etc) to buy Netflix and then make all new releases > v6-only for the first 48 hours. I bet my lame Brighthouse and Fios >

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

In message <4f2e19ba-d92a-4bec-86e2-33b405c30...@delong.com>, Owen DeLong writes: > > > On Oct 1, 2015, at 13:55 , Grzegorz Janoszka > wrote: > > > > On 2015-10-01 20:29, Owen DeLong wrote: > >> However, I think eventually the residential ISPs are going to start > charging

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 08:28:13AM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote: > > In message <4f2e19ba-d92a-4bec-86e2-33b405c30...@delong.com>, Owen DeLong > writes: > > > > > On Oct 1, 2015, at 13:55 , Grzegorz Janoszka > > wrote: > > > > > > On 2015-10-01 20:29, Owen DeLong wrote: > >

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

i'm still confused, to be honest. why are we 'encouraging' 'evangelizing' or 'forcing' ipv6 adoption. it's just a new addressing protocol that happens to not work with the rest of the internet. it's unfortunate that we made that mistake, but i guess we're stuck with that now (i wish i could say

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

> On Oct 1, 2015, at 15:28 , Mark Andrews wrote: > > > In message <4f2e19ba-d92a-4bec-86e2-33b405c30...@delong.com>, Owen DeLong > writes: >> >>> On Oct 1, 2015, at 13:55 , Grzegorz Janoszka >> wrote: >>> >>> On 2015-10-01 20:29, Owen DeLong wrote:

RE: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

> > That sounds like only using 6to4 addresses until the entire internet supports IPv6. > Unfortunately there were NEVER enough IPv4 addresses to actually do that. We > were effectively out of IPv4 addresses before we started. > People tend to forget that TCP/IP was not the only routing

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

OK… Let’s look at the ASN32 process. Use ASN 23456 (16-bit) in the AS-Path in place of each ASN32 entry in the path. Preserve the ASN32 path in a separate area of the BGP attributes. So, where in the IPv4 packet do you suggest we place these extra 128 bits of address? Further, what mechanism

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

"NANOG" <nanog-boun...@nanog.org>Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 22:42:57 > To: Mark Andrews<ma...@isc.org>; Owen DeLong<o...@delong.com> > Cc: <nanog@nanog.org> > Subject: Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption > > i'm still confused, to be honest. > > w

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

In message <20151001232613.gd123...@rootmail.cc.le.ac.uk>, Matthew Newton writes: > On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 10:42:57PM +, Todd Underwood wrote: > > it's just a new addressing protocol that happens to not work with the rest > > of the internet. it's unfortunate that we made that mistake, but

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On Thursday, October 1, 2015, Todd Underwood wrote: > i'm still confused, to be honest. > > why are we 'encouraging' 'evangelizing' or 'forcing' ipv6 adoption. > > it's just a new addressing protocol that happens to not work with the rest > of the internet. it's unfortunate

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On 10/1/2015 5:16 PM, Ca By wrote: I run a large 464xlat dominated mobile network. IPv4 bits are materially more expensive to deliver. Isn't that simply a consequence of your engineering decision to use 464xlat instead of native dual-stack, as was originally envisioned for the transition?

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

I’m not at all tied up in a particular protocol. Still, Todd, ignoring the other parts, the least you can do is answer this simple question: How would you implement a 128-bit address that is backwards compatible with existing IPv4 hosts requiring no software modification on those hosts?

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

for all. Regards, Dovid -Original Message- From: Todd Underwood <toddun...@gmail.com> Sender: "NANOG" <nanog-boun...@nanog.org>Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 22:42:57 To: Mark Andrews<ma...@isc.org>; Owen DeLong<o...@delong.com> Cc: <nanog@nanog.org> Subje

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 4:26 PM, Matthew Newton wrote: > On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 10:42:57PM +, Todd Underwood wrote: > > it's just a new addressing protocol that happens to not work with the > rest > > of the internet. it's unfortunate that we made that mistake, but i

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On Thursday, October 1, 2015, Matthew Kaufman wrote: > On 10/1/2015 5:16 PM, Ca By wrote: > >> >> I run a large 464xlat dominated mobile network. >> >> IPv4 bits are materially more expensive to deliver. >> > > Isn't that simply a consequence of your engineering decision to

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

If Time Warner (my ISP) put up IPv6 tomorrow, my firewall would no longer work. I could put up a pfsnse or vyatta box pretty quickly, but my off the shelf Cisco/Linksys home router has no ipv6 support hence the need to replace the hardware. There's no firmware update for it supporting ipv6

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

one interesting thing to note... On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 8:01 PM Mark Andrews wrote: > > Some of us have been running IPv6 in production for over a decade > now and developing products that support IPv6 even longer. > > We have had 17 years to build up a universal IPv6 network.

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

In message , Todd Underwood writes: > I can't tell if this question is serious. It's either making fun of the > embarrassingly inadequate job we have done on this transition out it's > naive and ignorant in a genius way. > >

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

In message , Todd Underwood writes: > > one interesting thing to note... > > On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 8:01 PM Mark Andrews wrote: > > > > > Some of us have been running IPv6 in production for over a decade > >

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

this is an interesting example of someone who has ill advisedly tied up his identity in a network protocol. this is a mistake i encourage you all not to make. network protocols come and go but you only get one shot at life, so be your own person. this is ad-hominem, owen and i won't engage.

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

Either there are multiple translation systems that exist that were invented late or there are not. Either Owen has never heard of any of them or he is trolling. In any case I'm giving up on that conversation. And this whole one. It goes nowhere. And this is why v6 is where it is: true believers.

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

In message <2bb18527-2f9c-4fee-95dd-3f89919a8...@xyonet.com>, Curtis Maurand wr ites: > If Time Warner (my ISP) put up IPv6 tomorrow, my firewall would no longer wo > rk. I could put up a pfsnse or vyatta box pretty quickly, but my off the sh > elf Cisco/Linksys home router has no ipv6

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On Thu 2015-Oct-01 18:28:52 -0700, Damian Menscher via NANOG wrote: On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 4:26 PM, Matthew Newton wrote: On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 10:42:57PM +, Todd Underwood wrote: > it's just a new addressing protocol that happens to not work

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

In a message written on Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 04:37:19PM -0400, David Hubbard wrote: > Had an idea the other day; we just need someone with a lot of cash > (google, apple, etc) to buy Netflix and then make all new releases > v6-only for the first 48 hours. I bet my lame Brighthouse and Fios >

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On 29/Sep/15 22:55, Josh Luthman wrote: > I think he means new releases are v6 for the first 48 hours...then trickle > to v4. Which means that people wanting to see that new release urgently > would have to wait two days. > > Netflix is definitely not the service to do that. Hulu, Amazon or

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

s/creating an/exacerbating the/ Owen > On Sep 29, 2015, at 22:42 , Mark Andrews wrote: > > > Ban the selling of IPv4 only home routers. The continued sale of > these devices is just creating a e-waste problem. > > -- > Mark Andrews, ISC > 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW

RE: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

With Netflix people might just dump the service, however, if you change all the social diarrhea sites (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc...) over to v6 only overnight, you either force the net to adopt v6 or people to talk to each other. Either way, it's a win-win. -Original Message-

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On 9/29/15, 4:37 PM, "David Hubbard" wrote: >Had an idea the other day; we just need someone with a lot of cash >(google, apple, etc) to buy Netflix and then make all new releases >v6-only for the first 48 hours. I bet my lame Brighthouse and Fios >service would

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On 30 September 2015 at 21:41, McElearney, Kevin < kevin_mcelear...@cable.comcast.com> wrote: > This only helps 1/3 of the challenge. Even with most Comcast customers > able to obtain IPv6 today and over 70% provisioned with IPv6, less than > 20% of the traffic is IPv6. There is still a need to

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

In message , Baldur Norddahl writes: > On 30 September 2015 at 21:41, McElearney, Kevin < > kevin_mcelear...@cable.comcast.com> wrote: > > > This only helps 1/3 of the challenge. Even with most Comcast customers > > able to

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 1:37 PM, David Hubbard < dhubb...@dino.hostasaurus.com> wrote: > Had an idea the other day; we just need someone with a lot of cash > (google, apple, etc) to buy Netflix and then make all new releases > v6-only for the first 48 hours. I bet my lame Brighthouse and Fios >

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

I think he means new releases are v6 for the first 48 hours...then trickle to v4. Which means that people wanting to see that new release urgently would have to wait two days. Netflix is definitely not the service to do that. Hulu, Amazon or HBO GO maybe. Netflix content tends to be pretty old

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

> On 29 Sep 2015, at 20:48 , Ca By wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 1:37 PM, David Hubbard < > dhubb...@dino.hostasaurus.com> wrote: > >> Had an idea the other day; we just need someone with a lot of cash >> (google, apple, etc) to buy Netflix and then make all new

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

another good idea is to design a migration path to ipv6 so that people using hte internet can also use the ipv6-internet. that would be cool. we should probably think about some migration path other than the pretty obviously implausible "dual stack" silliness before this stuff actually becomes a

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

Ban the selling of IPv4 only home routers. The continued sale of these devices is just creating a e-waste problem. -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org

Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

Op 29-09-15 om 22:37 schreef David Hubbard: > Had an idea the other day; we just need someone with a lot of cash > (google, apple, etc) to buy Netflix and then make all new releases > v6-only for the first 48 hours. I bet my lame Brighthouse and Fios > service would be v6-enabled before the end