On Jun 2, 2012, at 5:06 AM, Erik Moeller <e...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Moving towards full IPv6 support is part of our responsibility as a
> good Internet citizen, and this has been in the works for a long time.
> It's never been an option not to do this as IPv4 addresses are being
This is the relavent point. For what it is worth I, who am less inclined to
follow technical discussions than other kinds, remember that there was enough
talk about approaching IPv6 day last year to feel it was settled that WMF was
unprepared to participate at that time would make it happen in 2012. It was
either here or on wikitech-l.
I am not sure how someone who has strong opinions on the subject would be left
unable to follow this when I followed with no such interest. Moe importantly,
I don't understand what exactly the objectors see as a better option. No one
will fix the scripts until they are broken, it is just the nature of the beast.
It seems the whole point of IPv6 day is that no one is very confident about
level of breakage of things with IPv6 and no one will be able to gain this
confidence until a significant number of sites turn it on and there is not
another choice on the matter. Objecting to turning on IPv6 because things will
break does not seem to be very informed. This is the point. If anyone doesn't
trust that WMF will only make a day of it if the breakage is unmanageable, then
they've bigger issues than IPv6. And even still, the sun will rise and we will
have a few less IPv4 addresses everyday; there are much better battles to pick.
Wikimedia-l mailing list