[123570] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tom Vest)
Thu Mar 11 07:12:43 2010
From: Tom Vest <tvest@eyeconomics.com>
In-Reply-To: <m2r5nrxj9k.wl%randy@psg.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 07:12:00 -0500
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mar 11, 2010, at 5:08 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
>> I'm sorry, but some people are spending too much time denying
>> history. IPv6 has been largely ready for YEARS. Less than five years =
ago
>> a lot of engineers were declaring IPv6 dead and telling people that
>> double and triple NAT was the way of the future. It's only been over =
the
>> past two years that a clear majority of the networks seemed to agree
>> that IPv6 was the way out of the mess. (I know some are still in
>> denial.)=20
>=20
> http://www.hactrn.net/sra/vorlons
>=20
> a decade old, but still rings true
>=20
> randy
It's a nice essay, but the author seems to have overlooked the =
contingent fact that he's a member of a species that is actually =
supported by the ecosystem that he's writing about. The Sahara Desert is =
an ecosystem too, as is the surface of the moon.
Of course, the Internet is really only like an ecosystem in the way that =
Tokyo and Los Angeles and Lagos are individually like ecosystems. If you =
think you'd be indifferent to the question of which of these places =
you'd prefer to live in, and prefer your children to live in -- even =
knowing that there are no suburbs or country retreats to escape to, =
anywhere -- then I guess it really is just a philosophical question.
TV=
