[186817] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Another Big day for IPv6 - 10% native penetration
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Randy Bush)
Mon Jan 4 23:42:34 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 2016 13:42:28 +0900
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: George Metz <george.metz@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CANjVB-j5JCk-4sVUtfJj=aj-_QFvQUPmiHmObZZ1QkA7cMRF7w@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
>> the more interesting question to me is: what can we, ops and ietf, do
>> to make it operationally and financially easier for providers and
>> enterprises to go to ipv6 instead of ipv4 nat? carrot not stick.
>
> The problem is, the only way to make it easier for providers and
> enterprises to switch is to make it less scary looking and less complicated
> sounding. That door closed when it was decided to go with hex and 128-bit
> numbering. *I* know it's not nearly as bad as it seems and why it was done,
> and their network folks by and large know it's not as bad as it seems, but
> the people making the decisions to spend large sums of money upgrading
> stuff that works just fine thank-you-very-much are looking at it and saying
> "Ye gods... I sort of understand what IP means but that looks like an alien
> language!"
>
> At which point the ugly duckling gets tossed out on it's ear before it has
> a chance to become a swan.
sorry, i am not interested in the marketing and glossy paper crap. and
your dissing isps and enterprises is a part of the problem not part of
an approach to a solution.
this reminds me when one of the ietf ivory tower fools said (during the
TLA?NLA wars), and i quote, "the HD ratio will not work because
operators do not understand logarithms." and he still stands in the way
of useful progress.
randy
