nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 news
From: Randy Bush <randy () psg com>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 12:29:08 -1000
there would seem to be two paths here. the one we are currently walking has more and more complexity to try to deal with the lack of reality-based design in v6. every step, instead of making things simpler, adds more complexity to deal with the mistakes of old narrow decisions. consider an alternative. v6 is barely deployed at all, maybe 1/(10^6) of what it will be. so, a change that seems very expensive now will be trivially amortized if it saves later, while a cost that increases in time (shim6, 6to4, ...) will cost us massively in the future. so, if we had a free hand and ignored the dogmas, what would we change about the v6 architecture to make it really deployable and scalable and have compatibility with and a transition path from v4 without massive kludging, complexity, and long term cost? you can pay me now or pay me later. but later, everything costs a million times as much. randy
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 news, (continued)
- Re: IPv6 news JORDI PALET MARTINEZ (Oct 13)
- Re: IPv6 news Valdis . Kletnieks (Oct 13)
- Re: IPv6 news Paul Vixie (Oct 14)
- Re: IPv6 news Mark Prior (Oct 15)
- Re: IPv6 news Jared Mauch (Oct 15)
- Re: IPv6 news JORDI PALET MARTINEZ (Oct 13)
- Re: IPv6 news Brandon Butterworth (Oct 15)
- Re: IPv6 news John Reilly (Oct 16)
- Re: IPv6 news Joe Abley (Oct 16)
- Re: IPv6 news John Reilly (Oct 16)
- Re: IPv6 news Joe Abley (Oct 16)
- Re: IPv6 news Randy Bush (Oct 16)
- IPv6 daydreams David Barak (Oct 16)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Randy Bush (Oct 16)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Randy Bush (Oct 16)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams bmanning (Oct 16)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Randy Bush (Oct 16)
- Re: IPv6 news Joe Abley (Oct 16)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Suresh Ramasubramanian (Oct 16)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Jeroen Massar (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Peter Dambier (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Paul G (Oct 17)
- Message not available
- Re: IPv6 daydreams Peter Dambier (Oct 17)