Re: IPv6 Pain Experiment

[Doug Barton <dougb () dougbarton us>]

On 10/3/19 8:41 PM, Masataka Ohta wrote:
> Doug Barton wrote:
>
> > > Automatic renumbering involving DNS was important design goal
> > > of IPv6 with reasons.
> > >
> > > Lack of it is still a problem.
>
> > Meanwhile, the thing that most people miss about IPv6 is that except 
> > in edge cases, you never have to renumber. You get a massive address 
> > block that you can use as long as you pay your bill.
>
> That is called "provider lock-in", which is the primary
> reason, when IPng WG was formed, why automatic renumbering
> is necessary for IPv6.

... unless you're large enough to have your own address space. And even 
if you do need to change providers, once you have your addressing plan 
in place all you have to change is the prefix.

> > So, again, stop spreading FUD.
>
> Look at the fact that IPv6 failed badly.

Except that it's not failing, deployment and bits transported go up 
every month. Almost all of the large content providers are accessible 
via IPv6, and all of the major US mobile carriers are using it, some 
exclusively.

I get that you WANT it to fail, and you're entitled to your opinion. 
You're even entitled not to deploy it. But you're not entitled to your 
own facts.

Doug