Re: [RRG] Consensus? IPv4 scaling problem must be solved directly, not by relying on migration to IPv6

[Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>]

On 2008-05-26 02:42, Robin Whittle wrote:
...
> What I meant is that for any ordinary end-user to be happy with
> having only an IPv6 address - they would need some very high
> proportion of other end-users to be fully accessible via IPv6.

s/other end-users/desirable services/

This is the key point. For an IPv6-only client to be happy, the
services (s)he wishes to reach must be accessible via IPv6.
That is a vastly easier and more realistic goal than Robin
describes. It even has a built-in economic incentive, since
the service providers want clients*.

However, this isn't very relevant to RRG goals. What is relevant,
IMHO, is divining whether the BGP4 system for IPv4 will hit a
catastrophic scaling limit within a foreseeable timescale. If the
answer is 'yes' we need a first-class solution for IPv4; if the
answer is 'no' we only need a first-class solution for IPv6. Since
my divination skills are weak, it seems safer to seek a first-class
solution for both.

    Brian

* This argument applies to peer-to-peer services too. It slightly
increases the desirable properties of a supernode - the ideal
supernode will not only be outside firewalls and NATs, but will
also be dual stacked.

--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.com 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