-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 12:20 PM, David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org> wrote:
On Feb 17, 2009, at 11:28 AM, Tony Hain wrote:
Approach IPv6 as a new and different protocol.
Unfortunately, I gather this isn't what end users or network operators want or expect. I suspect if we want to make real inroads towards IPv6 deployment, we'll need to spend a bit more time making IPv6 look, taste, and feel like IPv4 and less time berating folks for "IPv4-think" (not that you do this, but others here do). For example, getting over the stateless autoconfig religion (which was never fully thought out -- how does a autoconfig'd device get a DNS name associated with their address in a DNSSEC-signed world again?) and letting network operators use DHCP with IPv6 the way they do with IPv4.
Or, we simply continue down the path of more NATv4.
Isn't that the basis for the "Principle of Least Astonishment"? ;-) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_least_astonishment - - ferg -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Desktop 9.6.3 (Build 3017) wj8DBQFJmxzsq1pz9mNUZTMRAkNLAKDHw0tWUOKjnCOqcInCp5h+L1yG2gCg+TZ1 OC+4/th4rmLSMzpV1138rrk= =pKl5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawgster(at)gmail.com ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/