Last Chance Rush -- was "Five Security Flaws in IPv6"
cfriacas at fccn.pt
Mon May 14 09:43:06 CEST 2007
On Sat, 12 May 2007, Roger Jorgensen wrote:
> On Fri, 11 May 2007, David Conrad wrote:
>>> 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.
> 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.
More information about the ipv6-ops