[140002] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: New IPv6 survey released on labs.ripe.net
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (MarcoH - lists)
Wed Apr 27 13:33:16 2011
From: MarcoH - lists <mch-nanog@xs4all.nl>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimUciQ6kJnXSWsyv41KAaVNnKtF0g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 19:32:24 +0200
To: Cameron Byrne <cb.list6@gmail.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
> Can we get mobile devices added to this? Mobile consumes a large =
amount of address space and is especially well suited for ipv6-only =
operations.
I would rather make it a separate study. Integrating this with CPE might =
become messy and it would make the survey really long and complicated. =
Of course anything is possible. We encourage people to contribute on =
RIPE Labs with ideas and experiments.=20
I think the first thing to do is to start a thread either here or on =
labs.ripe.net about what people would like to see from a survey on =
mobile devices. The CPE survey started of as a result of some work I did =
for my employer at the time. After a round of vendor selecting I was =
sitting on a pile of data and decided to publish it. Now I know my way =
around mobile a bit, but I am not an expert. So guidance on what is =
relevant and what not or help from somebody who knows more about mobile =
is more than welcome should we decide to push this forward.
> Unfortunately, the results would be painfully narrow. Now that Nokia =
no longer supports ipv6, there is no going forward ipv6 support on any =
mobile device (htc did something special for thunderbolt, it's not an =
android 3g feature )
>=20
> It's a very sad state of affairs.
=46rom what I know and seen so far this is indeed the sad situation we =
are in. At this stage I don't think publishing a survey towards end =
users would make the difference. But I am more than happy to find myself =
wrong on this one :)
Grtx,
MarcoH
--=20
"Good tests kill flawed theories; we remain alive to guess again"
