Re: IPv6

["Paul Melson" <pmelson () gmail com>]

> I say "lazy path forward" because at this point IPv6 is nearly 2 decades
old and arguably > has less of a foothold than ISDN after the same time
span. 

Hehe!  I just recycled some ISDN gear this year while thinking, "what a
shame."  But it's a good lesson in technology paradigms and standards
adoption.


> Almost all of what was considered "innovation" is either enfolded into
IPv4 or proven to > be less useful than imagined. I suspect a fair number of
right-thinking people are asking > "is this the best we can do? are we
really only doing this because we are running out of > addresses?" I worry
that we'll *only* get a bigger address space out of this migration 
> and that is a tragedy.

The cost-reward appraisal I've made of IPv6 is that it's not worth it right
now.  Of all of the problems I need to solve at a networking level, the
number of available public addresses isn't even a Top 20 issue.  I'm far
more likely to spend that kind of time and money and tolerate that level of
pain in order to migrate to DNSSEC or TSCP Secure Email as they solve
problems I don't have effective toolsets for managing today.  And their
adoption rates seem to be similar to IPv6. :-)

PaulM


_______________________________________________
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards () listserv icsalabs com
https://listserv.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards