On 6/9/15, 11:06 PM, "Lorenzo Colitti" <lorenzo@colitti.com> wrote:
Based on the facts, you could could just as well say that Apple is trying to advance the state of the art by refusing to provide suboptimal 464xlat and insisting instead that developers support IPv6-only networks as first-class citizens:
WG] I have suggested before that google needs to do the same thing with their app developers. Since you believe that your market power makes you able to influence the way that people deploy IPv6 (i.e. Not using DHCPv6 because you refuse to support it), perhaps it's time to wield that power to move the needle on IPv6 use in the app community instead of telling network operators that are deploying IPv6 that they're "doing it wrong"?
By the same token, you could argue that not supporting statful DHCPv6 address assignment advances the state of the art by trying to avoid slipping back into a "one-address-per-device-NAT-required" world.
WG] or you could argue that not supporting stateful DHCPv6 blocks IPv6 deployment by preventing it from being used on networks where it is otherwise available on applications that are perfectly happy to have one IPv6 address. That's a lot of traffic that ends up going to the NAT for no good reason. Thanks, Wes Anything below this line has been added by my company’s mail server, I have no control over it. ----------- This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.