As I wrote, I can't see how we could convince the world from going from where we are now to a world that requires people to change their network stack, add a new piece of infrastructure, and to change applications at the same time. That won't happen, any more. Even a "killer application" that requires a stack change and a piece of new infrastructure would be highly unlikely to succeed. Hence, try to minimise the amount of change required at each step.
If we follow that logic, how do we ever deploy any change? Any kind of locator/identifier semantics is necessarily a change, just because it is not the status quo. It will have impact somewhere in the stack and run into the brick wall of actual deployability.
I submit, rather, that we have the ability to deploy change, but that we only have one shot and we'd best do it right. IPv6, while distributed, is not actually deployed in the sense of it being enabled and pervasive yet. If we, as a body, reached consensus on a change, it would be tractable to deploy new stacks. Obviously, it needs to be a worthwhile change.
Tony -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
