Last Chance Rush -- was "Five Security Flaws in IPv6"

Carlos Friacas cfriacas at
Mon May 14 09:43:06 CEST 2007

On Sat, 12 May 2007, Roger Jorgensen wrote:

> On Fri, 11 May 2007, David Conrad wrote:
> <snip>
>>> In the end, addressing is still an ISP issue. And if ISPs don't push it, 
>>> they will reach the point where they will have to explain customer B that 
>>> customer A has its public addresses, but customer B will have to live only 
>>> with NAT -- bad luck, the world can be unfair now and then.
>> As should be readily apparent, the vast majority of customers, by and 
>> large, don't care.  If they did, ISPs would be beating down the RIR doors 
>> for IPv6 addresses and we wouldn't be having this discussion.  What 
>> customers care about is the ability to reach the content they care about. 
>> As long as that content overwhelming resides on IPv4, IPv6 is going to be a 
>> technogeek toy.
> customers don't care. How hard is it to get that? Customers care about one 
> thing, that they can reach the content they want on Internet.

Or place phone calls over it.
Or share files with their friends.
Or ...

> I tried quite hard to explain, even in a non-technical way, for my girlfriend 
> yesterday what this issue really mean for her and everyone and her comment 
> was "why should I care? Isn't it people like your's job to sort this out?

:-) The hard part is that this is an effort which needs global goodwill and 

If a group of ten (or even a hundred people) were managing all IP 
backbones in the world, global ipv6 deployment would be a lot easier to 

> try the same excercise on randon non-technical people you all know and I'm 
> quite sure you will all get the same reaction.

No doubt!


More information about the ipv6-ops mailing list