IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Last Call: RFC 6346 successful: moving to Proposed Standard

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Mon, 15 December 2014 23:06 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF0DB1A6F8E for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 15:06:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.4
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_37=0.6, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bpSLEP6c6q9L for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 15:06:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pd0-x22d.google.com (mail-pd0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::22d]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D448B1A6F8A for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 15:06:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pd0-f173.google.com with SMTP id ft15so12585728pdb.4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 15:06:24 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=z1iYJnHll12WEEnqL3aLjcNezX87lynz7UwUP4BGmtY=; b=BJL1+2mIEEW4yJZdykAtr6tyEkzubHIo5fEciPBOi252AnwBMgICqrRJoryH5NB0ff x7REs7C6KZWMi8B5IIP91TDAumuFoA1gktvDplIR/hgnZh/Isqkm8VAO0UWXQfLmGIk8 de4CJZjjsrxnMLRubUeRN9TF7j4GojgfVeoF5RnLc361dcjYnqOo/mQMRflunzklywa1 wIY57AOe2sW2xatZ4vZf0vqhJ4XXKjL7yUG8TWOI256rpEGrl0FYDypKfTVAl58bhSMN GiKQ3glr1nIkArS5KB4VDcW54uX/mP+xuydiRABGQbBVqcjbZe164aCT8Ye/8pGG9tPh K6dw==
X-Received: by 10.70.49.41 with SMTP id r9mr54791090pdn.83.1418684784062; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 15:06:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [130.216.38.108] ([130.216.38.108]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id je4sm10202406pbd.94.2014.12.15.15.06.21 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 15 Dec 2014 15:06:23 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <548F696E.3060707@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:06:22 +1300
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: heasley <heas@shrubbery.net>
Subject: Re: Last Call: RFC 6346 successful: moving to Proposed Standard
References: <AF1B977B-75D4-4AF2-B231-300AF2429317@nominum.com> <CAMm+Lwji9860CKaJB_9xi3ztiVUtP3NZ8AgO1wZAVTKVWW76Nw@mail.gmail.com> <CADC+-gR+sFUELOrdfVj5e3hW-KZoftotbhvEwF6aotZvq5wOkw@mail.gmail.com> <1DF3E368-D915-458C-8009-C508735D3C88@nominum.com> <5488FEE0.2030400@gmail.com> <84E9B4C0-A2E2-41BF-955A-1B125BBE63B1@nominum.com> <54890CD3.2050800@gmail.com> <20141211034501.1776A25434AE@rock.dv.isc.org> <20141212051204.GG39631@shrubbery.net> <548B42B5.50509@gmail.com> <20141215173855.GB2004@shrubbery.net>
In-Reply-To: <20141215173855.GB2004@shrubbery.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/3xb0NSHQ940MbfWUCOeJycSCpDY
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 23:06:27 -0000

On 16/12/2014 06:38, heasley wrote:
> Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 08:32:05AM +1300, Brian E Carpenter:
>> On 12/12/2014 18:12, heasley wrote:
>> ...
>>> I don't know anyone enchanted by v6.
>> Strange choice of word. I'm not in the least enchanted by IPv4
>> or by NAT44 either. I just know as a matter of fact that the
>> IPv4nternet ran out of addresses a while back and we have no
>> alternative but to fix it using IPv6. All the rest is details,
>> important details of course, but details.
> 
> The point is that expanded address space is the only reason folks are
> driven to v6.  The other protocol changes are not received as improvements
> and IMO have only served to further hinder adoption.  These could have
> been omitted and by doing so, i argue that, adoption would be (have been)
> swifter.

That might be true, but of course we will never know. The opposite
might have been true too ("Why bother upgrading to 64 bit addresses
when we can just use double NAT and there is no other improvement?").

    Brian

   Bria

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email