[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RRG] Migration to IPv6-only addresses
On 2007-09-30 15:25, Robin Whittle wrote:
RW> I can't avoid the conclusion that we are likely to be stuck with
RW> IPv4 and NAT forever. I would be happy for someone to prove me
The model has always been to plan for an indefinite period of
co-existence, with the background assumption that after some
large number of years, IPv4-only devices would die a natural
death. Whether you include that assumption or not has no
practical impact today in terms of what we should do.
I should have written "several decades" rather than "forever".
The main task of the RRG is to choose some architectural proposals -
probably for improving BGP and for a new IP-level ITR-ETR tunneling
system for both IPv4 and IPv6 - to be developed and widely deployed
in a timeframe of a few years.
I'm not sure that discussion beyond that point belongs on RRG.
I believe it is pertinent, since I sense a number of folks here -
perhaps including yourself - seem to think that the solution is to
migrate to IPv6.
To be clear, I don't believe, and hope I've never implied, that
IPv6 solves the problem we're discussing here. I believe that
deployment of IPv6 is essential, but for other reasons that
are nothing to do with RRG's mission. Solutions to the problem
we're discussing here need to be orthogonal to the size of
the address space, IMHO. For that reason, I don't want to enter
a discussion of IPv6 deployment here.
to unsubscribe send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg