[69663] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Lazy network operators
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Petri Helenius)
Sun Apr 18 10:57:06 2004
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 17:53:24 +0300
From: Petri Helenius <pete@he.iki.fi>
To: Paul Jakma <paul@clubi.ie>
Cc: Michel Py <michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us>,
Paul Vixie <paul@vix.com>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0404180341580.22749@fogarty.jakma.org>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Paul Jakma wrote:
>
>Well, let's be honest, name one good reason why you'd want IPv6
>(given you have 4)? And, to be more on-topic, name one good reason
>why a network operator would want it? Especially given that, apart
>from the traditional bleeding edges (academic networks), no customers
>are asking for it.
>
>
>
We need one (or more) of the p2p vendors to support it. Then IPv6
traffic will explode in three months to ~10-15% of all internet traffic.
Would make most p2p networks more efficient because almost all hosts
would have publicly routable addresses. If we want to grow the demand
for IPv6, it makes sense to focus on the application(s) that generate
most of the bits.
Pete
