|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0404180000050.22749@fogarty.jakma.org> Cc: nanog@merit.edu, Paul Vixie <paul@vix.com> From: Kurt Erik Lindqvist <kurtis@kurtis.pp.se> Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 12:37:40 +0200 To: Paul Jakma <paul@clubi.ie> Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 2004-04-18, at 01.10, Paul Jakma wrote: > Hmmm, or rather, there just wont be any demand for IPv6 deployment, > at least from the edges (consumers, small/medium networks). Why > bother changing if, despite the (almost indefinitely) availability of > sparse address space, one can not claim a tiny piece as ones' own? > Which is IPv4's only problem, at least as seen from the edges. > I think you will find that this varies a lot from region to region. There is no drive or need for it in the US, there is slightly more interest in Europe. But in Asia you will find that their scaling problem is completely different. I believe there will be a change. If it will be IPv6 as we know it today, that remains to be seen. - - kurtis - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 8.0.3 iQA/AwUBQIJadqarNKXTPFCVEQLuBACfZ6nPHPsCoYQaH/X9OzCF87WuhaQAn3nj FL/3cLcTZyZPIVmV0QXK/hF/ =VsLH -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |