IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Bar BoF on a 6to4 replacement?

Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> Thu, 13 November 2014 19:39 UTC

Return-Path: <nick@foobar.org>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 308E61ACE1B for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 11:39:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] 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 YPsqaBUmzmOs for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 11:39:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.netability.ie (mail.netability.ie [IPv6:2a03:8900:0:100::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 51DAE1ACE12 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 11:39:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Envelope-To: v6ops@ietf.org
Received: from cupcake.foobar.org (xe-0-0-2.transit07.phb1.foobar.org [87.192.56.84]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.netability.ie (8.14.9/8.14.5) with ESMTP id sADJd1iF082869 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 13 Nov 2014 19:39:21 GMT (envelope-from nick@foobar.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: cheesecake.netability.ie: Host xe-0-0-2.transit07.phb1.foobar.org [87.192.56.84] claimed to be cupcake.foobar.org
Message-ID: <546508D5.7040108@foobar.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 19:39:01 +0000
From: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>, Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>
References: <5454119C.3090601@network-heretics.com> <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D9831832D75F09@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com> <686FABB5-9A9E-4D0C-BD1A-19CA02A9C247@muada.com> <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D9831832D76378@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com> <AD4F3B9C-18D2-4B6F-867C-423368D6F489@muada.com> <4C77BAB8-38FD-4830-B779-E24586EB9275@delong.com> <5458294D.9000502@massar.ch> <64F92F49-4A31-4268-99D3-8A482E95735F@delong.com> <EB80E1B1-335F-45CA-BAFA-C2DB1BA58F1A@muada.com> <54643D0B.4070208@gmail.com> <88329C76-8C09-42D1-A0F7-9A65B98E1D44@muada.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1411132029560.25356@uplift.swm.pp.se>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1411132029560.25356@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/L68O2RGS93cW4UpGR7RSY9QLIew
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Bar BoF on a 6to4 replacement?
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 19:39:31 -0000

On 13/11/2014 19:34, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> I would rather people had good IPv4 connectivity and no IPv6 connectivity,
> than them having good IPv4 connectivity, so-so IPv6 connectivity, people
> learning that and turning off IPv6 to fix their problem, and then when
> their operator rolls out proper IPv6, the end user system still has IPv6
> turned off.

Part of that problem is making ipv6 simple enough for CPE vendors to create
products which are reliable enough to stop eyeballs from thinking that
disabling ipv6 will be a net gain for them.  Creating more protocol soup
will not help with this aim.

Nick

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status