Re: legacy /8

[William Warren <hescominsoon () emmanuelcomputerconsulting com>]

On 4/3/2010 1:31 PM, George Bonser wrote:
>    
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Larry Sheldon [mailto:LarrySheldon () cox net]
> > Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2010 8:43 AM
> > To: nanog () nanog org
> > Subject: Re: legacy /8
> >
> > On 4/3/2010 10:34, Michael Dillon wrote:
> >      
> > > > That adoption is so low at this point really says that it has
> > > >          
> > failed.
> >      
> > > In the real world, there is no success or failure, only next steps.
> > > At this point, IPv4 has failed,
> > >        
> > Failed?  Really?!!?!
> >
> >      
> Failed in the sense that I am not sure there is enough time left to
> really get v6 deployment going before we hit the wall.  It is like
> skydiving and waiting too long to open the chute.
>
> Any school teaching v4 at this point other than as a legacy protocol
> that they teach on the second year because "they might see it in the
> wild" should be closed down.  All new instruction that this point should
> begin and end with v6 with v4 as an "aside".  But that isn't.
>
>
>
>    
We've been dealing with the IPV4 myth now for over 7 years that i have 
followed it.  It's about as valid as the exaflood myth.  Part fo the 
reason folks aren't rushing to the V6 bandwagon is it's not needed.  
Stop doing the chicken little dance folks.  V6 is nice and gives us tons 
of more addresses but I can tell you V4 is more than two years form 
"dying" just by seeing all the arm flailing going around.