On 5 Oct 2019, at 15:44, Michel Py wrote:
Hi Job,
Job Snijders wrote :
If the IPv4 vs IPv6 tussle is interpreted as a culture war,
It is war, but I don't think it is a matter of culture. After all, 20
years ago we almost all were in the same boat, more or less. Most of
us believed that IPv6 could replace IPv4 in a reasonable number of
years, and all of us were wrong, because it did not.
you are right Michel, it hasn’t yet. I did not have any number of
years in my mind, but I was sure that it would quite long. The footprint
of IPv4 Internet (including OS, devices, software, networks, …) is so
so large, that it sure will take a loooooong time. Cobol is still in
use… I don’t think IPv4 will be dead in my lifetime. But that does
not mean we should not be working on its replacement to sustain the
growth. To me IPv6 is the only viable solution. It has gone through
pretty hard infancy, but is improving. Many of its great new ideas has
been almost abandonned, but the larger address space remains a clear win
over IPv4.
To me, this whole discussion is moot. IPv6 has not yet took over IPv4
yet. But that does not mean we shall not continue working on improving
IPv6 and deploying it and use it. Up to now, I have only see an increase
of the number of nodes/trafic over IPv6, by any metric or monitoring
system I’ve seen. The increase rate is not as most of us would like to
be, but still positive. To me, if we see a decrease of usage of IPv6
over some significant period of time, then we shall discuss about the
failing of IPv6. But we are not yet there.
Regards, Marc.
It have become a war because of money, and the outcome will be decided
by money, not by ideals. There are people who have admitted that, and
people who have not and keep waging the war as they could still win
it.
Time to be nice has come, and gone. The IPv6 camp has clearly stated
that their goal is to win the war. Battle time.
Michel.
