IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: A Plea for Architectural & Specification Stability with IPv6

t.petch <ietfc@btconnect.com> Thu, 13 March 2014 18:28 UTC

Return-Path: <ietfc@btconnect.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87C941A0728 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 11:28:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 hj2RV0BHyOlO for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 11:28:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from emea01-am1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-am1lp0017.outbound.protection.outlook.com [213.199.154.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF3951A0654 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 11:28:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from DB3PRD0210HT005.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com (157.56.253.69) by AMSPR07MB050.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (10.242.81.24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.898.11; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 18:28:20 +0000
Message-ID: <02a401cf3ee9$40bf1380$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
From: "t.petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com>
To: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
References: <E2C06D73-99FF-42B5-A3BE-337C307BCB0E@gmail.com> <87F8422E-9BF2-4269-A3A4-54AB1C0B257B@cisco.com> <CAD6AjGTHcsZ1Ob8m_6=mvFS_9byPMYd82xX0tRYc4+FrfaqjuA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: A Plea for Architectural & Specification Stability with IPv6
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 18:22:29 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
X-Originating-IP: [157.56.253.69]
X-ClientProxiedBy: AMSPR07CA019.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (10.242.225.177) To AMSPR07MB050.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (10.242.81.24)
X-Forefront-PRVS: 01494FA7F7
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009001)(6009001)(428001)(24454002)(51444003)(189002)(199002)(377454003)(13464003)(51704005)(76796001)(46102001)(88136002)(47736001)(77096001)(50986001)(47976001)(90146001)(49866001)(44736004)(77156001)(76786001)(23756003)(56816005)(50226001)(4396001)(74662001)(74502001)(31966008)(47446002)(89996001)(86362001)(94316002)(93136001)(74876001)(92566001)(97186001)(76482001)(87286001)(87266001)(97336001)(93516002)(94946001)(80976001)(19580395003)(83322001)(19580405001)(62966002)(81542001)(66066001)(80022001)(51856001)(84392001)(61296002)(92726001)(65816001)(77982001)(59766001)(81342001)(79102001)(54316002)(44716002)(63696002)(47776003)(93916002)(53806001)(85852003)(95666003)(62236002)(20776003)(83072002)(85306002)(42186004)(74706001)(33646001)(74366001)(56776001)(95416001)(69226001)(87976001)(14496001)(50466002)(74416001)(7726001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:AMSPR07MB050; H:DB3PRD0210HT005.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com; FPR:E54CF20D.B5C69BE5.B3EBF768.43E5DBB8.202D4; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:0; LANG:en;
Received-SPF: None (: btconnect.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
X-OriginatorOrg: btconnect.com
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/d4s6bhJt6_PsaNlJNrJF_nSXwJk
Cc: ipv6@ietf.org, RJ Atkinson <rja.lists@gmail.com>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 18:28:31 -0000

--- Original Message -----
From: "Cb B" <cb.list6@gmail.com>
To: "Fred Baker" <fred@cisco.com>
Cc: "RJ Atkinson" <rja.lists@gmail.com>; <ipv6@ietf.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2014 4:29 PM
On Mar 13, 2014 9:20 AM, "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com> wrote:
> On Mar 13, 2014, at 5:49 AM, RJ Atkinson <rja.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
> >       The IETF keeps changing IPv6.  Clearly IPv6 is not yet
> >       ready for widespread use until they stop changing
> >       the specifications.
>
> With respect, if the changes you mentioned are considered fundamental
changes to IPv6, the IETF has spent the past 25 years changing IPv4.
Nobody
anywhere should consider deploying IPv4 until we finish changing it.

Fred

I think that the key difference is that with IPv4, there was little else
that users could do - OSI, DECNet ?

With IPv6, most users have a choice - stay with IPv4.

I think that Ran accurately identifies one of the reasons for poor
deployment, tinkeritis, but that another reason is the sheer complexity
of IPv6 compared with IPv4.

Both topics surface here, and on v6ops, at intervals.

Tom Petch


+1 for Fred

RJ please dont confuse  excuses with reality.

If you can give me a real example of somebody with a real reason to not
deploy ipv6 i would be interested.

I can give you real examples of large and small mobile, docsis, dsl,
university, enterprise campus, ... networks that have deployed ipv6 in
the
real world.  Ipv6 deployment is very real.

Evolution is how we run the internet. The relevant WG weigh all the pros
and cons for any change, no need for some paper tiger to freeze
evolution.
We dont want to be Académie française

CB
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email