On Aug 14, 2011, at 5:43 PM, Tim Wilde wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 8/14/2011 8:36 PM, Charles N Wyble wrote:
Can someone explain the operational relevance of the never ending v6 threads that are the EXACT SAME ARGUMENTS over and over and over again? :)
Yes, they prove that IPv6 is not a viable technology as it currently stands and we should be working on the next big thing, of course! IPv42, here I come!
On a serious note, though, really, what DOES it say about the real-world maturity / actual chances of adoption for IPv6 that Charles' statement above is, in fact, true? Not trying to be anti-IPv6 or start a flamewar (well, okay, I am trying to start a flamewar, that's what Sunday nights are for :)), it's honestly something that puzzles me. It just doesn't feel right…
What does it say that the same thing happens in IPv4? I really don't see a significant difference in that regard. Yes, IPv6 is currently a little less fully baked than IPv4. IPv4 is 20 years older than IPv6, so I say that's to be somewhat expected. Owen