[mdlug] OT: the great IPv6 debate

[Aaron Kulkis]

Dan Pritts wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 04:55:34PM -0400, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
>> So, just use IPv4 forever?  And there will be protocol overlap for at
> 
> I said something along the lines of "it's all about the address
> space.  All the rest is gravy."
> 
> So, no, don't use ipv4 forever.  but let's not get ourselves worked
> up about how this is the greatest thing we'll ever do; it's a big pain
> in the ass, but a necessary one.
> 
> I think it's gonna be ugly for a few years, though, when the address
> space runs out.   
> 

The sooner the migration, the better.

I think the big stumbling block right now will be the massive
amount of software which will need to be, at the very least,
recompiled (assuming that the authors used symbolic names
for IP addresses defined in the .h files rather than declaring
addresses as "long int"

>> If there was no IPv6 connectivity your client should not have acquired a
>> routeable IPv6 address. 
> 
> should not != did not
> 
> this happened to some of my users somehow.  I think it was when
> people moved from our wired net (has v6) to our wireless net
> (braindead, v4 only).  Might have just been a problem with XP.
> 
> I've also read that certain apple airport base station/routers 
> had a bug wherein they advertised v6 connectivity when there was none.
> 
> just a bug in a stupid router, yes.  Exacerbated by bad application
> software behavior.
> 
> 
> regardless of the above, it happens much more frequently that the
> ipv6 internet is fragmented (even though ipv4 connectivity is still
> available to the site in question).  Borked routing somewhere,
> usually.
> 
> it's a vicious cycle; nobody uses v6, so the providers don't notice
> when it's broken.  So, nobody uses it, because it's broken.

When the ISPs run out of address space, they'll not only notice,
THEY will force the issue on their customers, whether the
customers want it or not.  And it will be hastily done, because
that's how American management tends to operate (do everything
as late as possible), because that's what they teach them in
the management schools (because, unlike business schools which
teach "bring in as much revenue as possible" which encourages
development of new services and capabilities, management schools
teach "keep overhead costs as low as possible" which discourages
pro-active development of future revenue expansion.)

:-/

To me, the big question will be -- which ISP will heavily
advertise that they offer IPv6 -- to the point that then
non-technical community becomes aware that there is even
an issue.