[30934] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: IPv6 allocatin (was Re: ARIN Policy on IP-based Web Hosting)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Vadim Antonov)
Fri Sep 1 18:15:08 2000
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2000 14:03:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: Vadim Antonov <avg@kotovnik.com>
To: Christian Kuhtz <ck@arch.bellsouth.net>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <NDBBIHGIMLHECOLBHAACMEENDNAA.ck@arch.bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.04.10009011358560.15694-100000@kitty.kotovnik.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Christian Kuhtz wrote:
> Admittedly an interesting thought to encourage propagation, but then
> again, you can't treat an IPv6 migration as if IPv4 is just going to
> disappear overnight. So, that type of co-existance might actually be a
> good thing. Interop is typically where most issues occur.
Are we building production networks or doing experiments? IPv6 exhibits
no added functionality over IPv4 + NAT, so why bother?
> Pure v4 or v6 stacks are typically no brainers.
Yeah, sure, that's why there are so many broken IPv4 stacks around.
---vadim
