It just shows how badly even intelligent people may misunderstood the simple problem
Posted Jan 26, 2011 13:36 UTC (Wed) by khim
In reply to: It just shows how badly even intelligent people may misunderstood the simple problem
Parent article: LCA: Vint Cerf on re-engineering the Internet
From what I can tell, DJB wrote his piece in 2002. That's over 8 years ago.
How much IP sensitive network equipment is around from then or even before that when IPv6 was designed? Problably little.
Wrong question. Right question: how much IP sensitive network equipment without IPv6 support are still produced today? Probably a lot. People are delaying IPv6 as much as possible - and without "magic function" you can not change anything there. This is well-known phenomenon and you can not change much there.
Bernstein explains how to solve non-problem: how to marry endpoints if the routing infrastructure does not need an upgrade (as was in the case of MX records: you needed change on Internet endpoints, but it didn't affect routers in the middle). IPv4-to-IPv6 transition does not need to solve such problem because it does not exist: most endpoints have IPv6 support (and had for many years) already. The real problem (the need to upgrade routers "in the middle") is silently ignored in the article.
It is a simple fact that right now we cannot reach any IPv6 hosts from pure IPv4 addresses that have been around for a while.
This was never in the plan - and rightfully so.
All the software and networking equipment is way newer than that and it just doesn't work.
Sure - but this is because IPv4 addresses are still available! They are expensive, true, but they are available!
That is interoperability failure, whether you want to admit it or not.
No, this is application of "Internet only just works" principle. IPv6 will be employed when it'll be needed - and not before. IP, CIDR and other network-wide specifications were introduced under extreme pressure when other options were exhausted - because any other way just does not make any sense from economics POV. I suspect that LTE which will introduce hundred of millions IPv6-only clients will be the required push, but then again, may be not (proxies will mitigate the problem for a while). But Bernstein's plan is just stupid: the fact that you need new kind of IP number supplied by ISP never was a problem (and still is not a problem). The fact that ISP must replace it's expensive hardware was and is a problem - and article kind of ignores that problem completely.
to post comments)