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
> exhausted.

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.

Birgitte SB
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Reply via email to