Re: Alternative Re: ipv4/25s and above Re: 202211201009.AYC

[David Conrad <drc () virtualized org>]

Barry,

On Nov 21, 2022, at 3:01 PM, bzs () theworld com wrote:
> We've been trying to get people to adopt IPv6 widely for 30 years with very limited success

According to https://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html, it looks like we’ve gone from ~0% to ~40% in 12 
years. https://stats.labs.apnic.net/ipv6 has it around 30%. Given an Internet population of about 5B, this can 
(simplistically and wrongly) argued to mean 1.5-2B people are using IPv6. For a transition to a technology that the 
vast majority of people who pay the bills will neither notice nor care about, and for which the business case typically 
needs projection way past the normal quarterly focus of shareholders, that seems pretty successful to me.

But back to the latest proposal to rearrange deck chairs on the IPv4 Titanic, the fundamental and obvious flaw is the 
assertion of "commenting out one line code”. There isn’t “one line of code”. There are literally _billions_ of 
instances of “one line of code”, the vast majority of which need to be changed/deployed/tested with absolutely no 
business case to do so that isn’t better met with deploying IPv6+IPv4aaS. I believe this has been pointed out numerous 
times, but it falls on deaf ears, so the discussion gets a bit tedious.

Regards,
-drc

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP