-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 12:20 PM, David Conrad <d...@virtualized.org> wrote:
> On Feb 17, 2009, at 11:28 AM, Tony Hain wrote: >> >> Approach IPv6 as a new and different protocol. > > Unfortunately, I gather this isn't what end users or network operators > want or expect. I suspect if we want to make real inroads towards IPv6 > deployment, we'll need to spend a bit more time making IPv6 look, taste, > and feel like IPv4 and less time berating folks for "IPv4-think" (not > that you do this, but others here do). For example, getting over the > stateless > autoconfig religion (which was never fully thought out -- how does a > autoconfig'd device get a DNS name associated with their address in a > DNSSEC-signed world again?) and letting network operators use DHCP with > IPv6 the way they do with IPv4. > > Or, we simply continue down the path of more NATv4. > Isn't that the basis for the "Principle of Least Astonishment"? ;-) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_least_astonishment - - ferg -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Desktop 9.6.3 (Build 3017) wj8DBQFJmxzsq1pz9mNUZTMRAkNLAKDHw0tWUOKjnCOqcInCp5h+L1yG2gCg+TZ1 OC+4/th4rmLSMzpV1138rrk= =pKl5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawgster(at)gmail.com ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/
