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

[heasley <[e-mail]>]

Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 02:45:00PM +1100, Mark Andrews:
> Because most of the world has sat on its collective backsides until
> it was too late to do a nice orderly dual stack deployment model
> without having to share IPv4 addresses between customers.   Now
> many ISP's are just trying to keep IPv4 on life support long enough
> to move everybody to IPv6.

yawn.  Much of the end-user equipment still does not support v6.  Much
of it has to be replaced with newer h/w for v6 support or support folks
have to visit each site to perform upgrades (spendy).  Many core devices
still have partial or missing support.  Some protocols still lack v6
support.  Multihoming is looking rather ugly for small networks (like
those with just 1 v4 /24, thus need less than a v6/48).  usw.

How much quicker do folks think implementation would have been by vendors,
then adoption by users, had the ietf not felt obligated to rearchitect v4?
vs. just expand the address space and ship it, which is the only area where
v6 appears to shine anyway.  [yes, I am ignoring the need for transition
mechanisms]

I don't know anyone enchanted by v6.