[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
IPv6 Thought Experiment
- Subject: IPv6 Thought Experiment
- From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine)
- Date: 2 Oct 2019 13:23:27 -0400
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
In article <5DCAE7A8-1D33-4EA2-BBB1-7A3E8132D55B at gmail.com> you write:
>What do you think would happen? Would it be the only way to reach 100% IPv6 deployment, or even that wouldnâ??t be sufficient?
If you have to impose an artificial tax to force people to use IPv6,
you've clearly admitted that IPv6 is a failure and can't stand on its
own merits. Should this happen, I'd expect massive use of CGN to hide
entire networks behind a single IPv4 address, and a mass exodus of
hosting business to other places which are not so stupid. Mobile networks
would be less affected because many of them are IPv6 internally already.
>What I am trying to understand is whether deploying IPv6 is a pure financial problem.
To some degree, anything is a financial problem. How about if I
charge you a hundred dollars for every packet you send using IP rather
than CLNS and CLNP and a thousand dollars for every virtual circuit
using TCP rather than X.25?