[136105] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: quietly....
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Iljitsch van Beijnum)
Tue Feb 1 07:16:49 2011
From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>
In-Reply-To: <3A05D51F-6792-497A-82A5-71DAA986772E@delong.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 13:16:32 +0100
To: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 1 feb 2011, at 13:01, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>> IPv4 is very dead in the sense that it's not going to go anywhere in =
the future.
>> taking the long view - your statement applies equally to IPv6.
IPv6 has many places to go in the future. Of course the future is long, =
and there will be a point when IPv6 is no longer what's needed. But =
we're nowhere close to that point now.
> I disagree. I think there is little, if any, innovation that will =
continue to be put
> into IPv4 hence forth. I think there will be much innovation in IPv6 =
in the
> coming years.
I'm afraid it may be the other way around: lots of IPv4 innovation just =
so IPv6 can be avoided a few more years.=
