Who will pay - this is the question...
Posted Jan 26, 2011 14:20 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
Sorry, but you completely misinterpreted what DJB wrote. He was talking about upgrading everything on the net with software that understands both types of addresses. This includes routers. This was 8 years ago - plenty of time.
To throw good money after bad? All pieces where it was cheap and easy to add IPv6 support were upgraded in these 8 years, only routers are the hold-out - and they are real problem.
The reason this wasn't done is that IPv6 in its form (as proposed) was useless and not interoperable with IPv4, ergo nobody wanted to spend time configuring something that had no application.
No, the reason it was not done is that it's more expensive to install IPv6 on router and gives you no benefits. DJB does not address this issue at all. In his plan ISPs will magically decide to be altruists and install more expensive and useless hardware for the sake of the future. This is not how ISPs operate if they want to survive.
The whole thing should have happened transparently, so that current IPv4 site didn't have to change a single thing to work with IPv6 addresses.
Have you read the article? This is definitely not what I'm seeing:
(2) I control the operating system and the applications. I am ready and willing to make various changes to the code.
(3) However, I refuse to provide any information to those programs beyond what they already have (such as my IPv4 addresses), and I refuse to do any work outside changing the programs themselves. I'm not going to ask my ISP for an IPv6 address, for example, and I'm not going to touch my DNS data.
This asinine dilemma does not change anything WRT to real problem.
If network manufacturers received that message, there would be no question which equipment to buy. It would be one and the same.
How come? How exactly you propose to make IPv6 router as cheap as IPv4 router? Remember: IPv4 routers are highly-optimized pieces of ASIC which are optimized for particular bit-layout of packets (if you use optional flags in IPv4 they slowdown by factor of 10x-100x, these packets are dropped early, etc). This is critical question - and both you and DJB keep to ignore it.
And you would not have IPv6/v4 stack combos on OSes - just IPv6 that included IPv4.
There are very few OSes without IPv6. The problem lies with networking hardware. You know: FPGA, ASICs - things which are expensive and hard to change.
That's the point that you missed.
I've not missed it: as I've said it's irrelevant. The problem which this approach was supposed to fix either does not exist (we can change OS and everything else, but can not ask for a new IPv6 address - WTF? why no?) or impossible (we want to participate in IPv4 network using only IPv6 address: how?). The real problem is not discussed at all: DJB presumes that it's easy to change hardware/software on ISP side and hard on the client side while in reality it's the other way around.
to post comments)