Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 08:22:11 -0500 (EST) From: Andy Dills <andy@xecu.net> To: Mark Andrews <Mark_Andrews@isc.org> Cc: vadim_nuclight@mail.ru, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: INET6 required for SCTP in 7.0? Message-ID: <20080305082031.E37745@shell.xecu.net> In-Reply-To: <200803041307.m24D7uqE057842@drugs.dv.isc.org> References: <200803041307.m24D7uqE057842@drugs.dv.isc.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008, Mark Andrews wrote: > It would be better to remove the option all together. IPv6 > is no longer a protocol under development. There is no > need to make it optional any more. Having it there really > sends the wrong signal. With all due respect, let's face a couple of facts. IPv4 is going to be the primary protocol for several years to come. There are a few critical reasons, and few people like to point out just how naked the emperor is: - Providing IPv6 currently (and for the forseeable future) provides no return on investment (ROI). Service Providers can't make more money with IPv6, businesses do not get any sort of competitive or perceived advantage from deploying IPv6, and end users certainly don't want to deal with it. - To route IPv6 with the same features and packet forwarding rate as with IPv4, nearly every network will be forced to purchase expensive router upgrades with no other real benefit beyond IPv6 connectivity (which again provides no ROI to justify the capex). Nobody is going to do forklift upgrades just for IPv6, but as routers get normally upgraded IPv6 functionality will indeed slowly expand. - IPv6 provides almost no technological upgrades beyond additional address space. DHCP addressed the auto configuration feature, VPNs addressed IPsec. - IPv4 address spaces will eventually transition to a market commodity model, providing a financial incentive that will encourage significant optimization and provide motive for providers to audit their allocations, and for businesses to part with IP space that they no longer properly utilize. The cost of acquiring IPv4 space will be less than the cost of upgrading to IPv6. Therefore, given a lack of ROI or sufficient technological motivation, and given the significant potential for optimization of existing IPv4 space both via technology and financial incentive, I see a minimum of five years before IPv6 is common. In the meantime, I'd like to only enable IPv6 on IPv6 enabled networks. Andy --- Andy Dills Xecunet, Inc. www.xecu.net 301-682-9972 ---
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080305082031.E37745>