2012/6/8 Anthony <wikim...@inbox.org>: > You seem to be assuming that vandals will switch to IPv6 at the same > rate as non-vandals. > > An analogous assumption, which has proven to be false, would be that > vandals would use anonymizing proxies at the same rate as non-vandals.
Perhaps. There's no way to know unless we try. > >> If there is little content available on IPv6, people will >> not even be aware it exists and they will not demand it from their >> ISP, which means there will be no users for IPv6 content making it >> useless and the loop will continue. Someone had to break this loop and >> the content providers were the easiest place this could happen. > > No one has to break the loop. The loop will break itself. Either > enough people will get sick of NAT to cause demand for IPv6, or they > won't. That one way of seeing things, but I fear it's a bit simplistic and naive. People won't "get sick of NAT", since most of them don't know what NAT is anyway. They'll just notice that "the speed sucks" or that they can't edit Wikipedia because their public IP was blocked. But they won't know IPv6 is (part of) the solution unless someone tells them to, by events like the IPv6 day. Strainu _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
