nanog mailing list archives
Re: Content provider plans
From: Sean Donelan <sean () donelan com>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 13:57:07 -0400 (EDT)
On Wed, 30 May 2007, Michal Krsek wrote:
Few weeks ago I had interesting discussion with *unnamed* Google VIP. His answer has been: "Google engineers doesn't see need to spend money on building IPv6 infrastructure. You, as user, can motivate them by sending request supporting this idea."So did you write your e-mail to Google techies?
Why would Google techies care. However you might point out to Google advertisers how many eyeballs no longer get their advertising because
they are on IPv6 connections.Oh, that's right. User's probably don't know or care whether its IPv6, IPv4 or IPX. After a while, when the IPv4toIPV6 tunnels and translators are overloaded, some eyeballs and content will discover each other gets
better performance going "native." And it will happen. Trying to force it before just makes it grumpy. The Internet has always been an example of just-in-time engineering. --Caution buying from UltraDNS/Neustar. Its monthly rates aren't actually monthly.
Current thread:
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted, (continued)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Kevin Loch (May 29)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted matthew zeier (May 28)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted matthew zeier (May 28)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Iljitsch van Beijnum (May 29)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted JORDI PALET MARTINEZ (May 29)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Chris L. Morrow (May 29)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Larry J. Blunk (May 31)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Jeroen Massar (May 31)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Chris L. Morrow (May 31)
- Re: Content provider plans Michal Krsek (May 30)
- Re: Content provider plans Sean Donelan (May 30)
- RE: NANOG 40 agenda posted michael.dillon (May 29)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Jeroen Massar (May 29)
- RE: NANOG 40 agenda posted michael.dillon (May 29)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Adrian Chadd (May 29)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Iljitsch van Beijnum (May 29)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted David W. Hankins (May 30)
- Re: DHCPv6 and stateless autoconf, was: NANOG 40 agenda posted Iljitsch van Beijnum (May 30)
- Re: DHCPv6 and stateless autoconf, was: NANOG 40 agenda posted David W. Hankins (May 30)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Chris L. Morrow (May 30)
- RE: NANOG 40 agenda posted Chris L. Morrow (May 29)