> Let us spin this another way. If you cannot even expect mild change such > as 240/4 to become prevalent enough to be useful, on what do you base your > optimism that the much larger changes IPv6 requires will? > > Joe > > Easy - Greater return on the investment; i.e. - instead of getting an IPv4 /4 out of the effort you get an IPv6 Global Unicast Space of 2000::/3 (just for starters, counting neither the rest of the unicast nor multicast, etc. spaces.).
Also, the impact of the "changes required" is close to the same in that every node needs to be touched - that is the hard part, getting updates deployed. *(Unless you want 240/4 to be a special/limited use case - in which case the effort is smaller, but so is the reward ...)* /TJ
