[AusNOG] [LINK] [ISOC-AU-mems] Happy Birthday ... AARNet

[Matthew Moyle-Croft]

Not sure about your argument.

The main problem is that at the moment that the standards that deliver 
v6 broadband in a general sense are still all draft and, at the moment, 
don't quite work together.  (Feel free to tell me I'm wrong, but ONLY if 
you can actually send me a complete set of receipes to do it as at least 
one Broadband Forum member has told me it can't be done yet).  The main 
sticking point is prefix delegation and how that works in an end-user's 
network.

Once this is fixed and people stop having pissing matches about who wins 
(AutoConf, DHCPv6 etc) we'll be sweet and the CPE vendors can finish 
their work.

(Yes, you can do this in the simple case with static ranges etc, but 
that doesn't scale and doesn't work for normal people like my parents).

MMC

dasmo wrote:
> Seems to me the problem is cash. ISPs won't eat it. Probably need it  
> subsidised by the government. Some transit providers still aren't ipv6  
> compatible, there's customer equiptment that needs to be replaced and  
> there's no authority setting a deadline like the digital tv system.  
> Plus, it's hard to explain the benefits to an end user who will most  
> likely see the issues now rather than a solution to an issue from the  
> future.
>
> Would be a better use of money than that stupid filter though.
>
> On 17/03/2009, at 16:57, Mark Smith <marksmith at adam.com.au> wrote:
>
>   
>> Geoff Huston wrote:
>>     
>>>> I specifically remember a slip connection to Hawaii growing from  
>>>> 1200
>>>> bps to 2400 bps preceeding the 56Kb frame relay connection.
>>>>         
>> <snip>
>>
>>     
>>> Yawn. That was years ago. On to today's problems. What are we going  
>>> to
>>> do given that noone is doing anything remotely serious in IPv6 and  
>>> the
>>> crunch time of IPv4 address exhaustion is getting ever closer? If we
>>> can't manage to preserve some level of protocol coherence across the
>>> network in the coming few years then we may end up not much better  
>>> off
>>> than the situation on 20 years ago. Or do we say goodbye to all this
>>> end-to-end IP stuff and just run client sever over http and forget
>>> than anything else was ever possible?
>>>
>>>       
>> I don't think Internet end-users are aware of the problem, let a alone
>> what it is, why its occurring, and what the consequences will be. They
>> haven't been told what it is, and they don't know to ask for it.
>>
>> That seems to me to be a marketing problem. We need to get the message
>> to the Internet end-user market that the Internet is heading towards a
>> wall, and needs to be upgraded. We need to explain in very simple  
>> terms,
>> what the problem is - "The Internet is running out of phone numbers!"
>> (and then explain that public Internet addresses are like phone  
>> numbers)
>> - I think should be a simple enough place to start.
>>
>> Who should run this campaign? ISOC or the IPv6 Forum (or both) I  
>> reckon.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Mark.
>> _______________________________________________
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>     
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>   

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20090317/42c4cdce/attachment.html>