RE: NANOG 40 agenda posted

["Chris L. Morrow" <christopher.morrow () verizonbusiness com>]

On Tue, 29 May 2007 michael.dillon () bt com wrote:

> > For core links it should IMHO be mostly possible to keep them
> > IPv4/IPv6
> > dual-stack.
>
> What's wrong with MPLS in the core and 6PE at the edge?
>
> Right there you have two possible tactics that are worthy of being
> publicly discussed and compared.

stewart bamford gave a good presentation about this very thing 4 nanogs
ago (or maybe 5)> There are some support issues to keep in mind of course.
> > For Cable
> > systems only recently the Docsis 3.0 standard was released and that
> > would still require a lot of upgrades. Tunneling those users
> > might be a
> > way to provide IPv6 connectivity to these users without much
> > ado.
>
> Cable is a consumer access technology. Realistically, IPv6 is going to
> kick off with deployments to research, education and business users, not
> consumers. Cable will catch up in their own good time as they are driven
> to IPv6 by RFC 1918 exhaustion.

what's interesting is the chicken/egg problem of users/content/ipv6.
What's driving v6 deployment?