IPv6 *is* like AMD
Posted Jan 27, 2011 10:26 UTC (Thu) by khim
In reply to: IPv6 *is* like AMD
Parent article: LCA: IP address exhaustion and the end of the open net
We had a chance to do this, transparently, but because of a few purists, it never happened.
No, we had no such chance. Instead we had the following discussion:
DJB: You all are stupid - it's possible to solve A, B, C and D transparently.
IPv6devs: How will you solve problem X?
DJB: You can easily solve A, B, C and D - even if it'll lead to the trouble in the future!
IPv6devs: You plan still have no solution for the problem X.
bojan: Everyone is crazy - there was great plan to solve A, B, C, and D. And it was ignored. Fools you are!
khim: This plan was asinine because it ignored preoblem X - and it's the heart of problem.
bojan: No, it was pefect - it solved A, B, C, D.
... discussion is repeated 10 times.
Sorry. DJB plan was either fairy tale or a fraud - depending on your viewpoint. Because it still does not solve problem X - and this is the only part that matters.
It's only cheaper not to run IPv6 because there is nothing to run there, of course (i.e. your fancy IPv6 routers see packets every couple of hours).
DJB's plan does not change it because it does not solve problem X.
Why would people sink millions into equipment when all of their customers are on IPv4 (i.e. their IPv4 addresses and configs are unusable on IPv6)
Valid question - and because DJB's plan does not solve problem X it does not change the answer.
And yet, some forward looking ISPs have the whole core enabled for IPv6 already.
But guess what? No customers.
This is incorrect: there a lot of customers. They just don't know they are customers because there are nothing to see on the IPv6 network.
Why? Because nobody cares to reconfigure for no immediate benefit. More importantly, why should they have to? It's just nonsense.
Yup. Think about it: 0.3% penetration is about 4 million of people. Do you really believe every single one went and separately configured IPv6? No, it happened automatically for most of them - without any DJB plan at all.
You know, you are kinda disproving your own points :-)
PS. It was also cheaper to keep running 32-bit software. Ergo, no need to enable 64-bits in hardware. We could have had PAE for a few more decades, I'm sure. :-)
Sorry, but no. PAE only goes to 64GiB. Systems with 128GiB are already common. On the customer side systems with 4GiB are common and indeed these systems are orten 32bit even today.
to post comments)