Internet transparency (Re: Geoff on IPv4 Exhaustion)

Doug Barton dougb at
Mon Nov 21 22:04:07 CET 2011

On 11/21/2011 12:27, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Corporate IT departments are generally speaking the enemies of
> innovation,

No argument there.

> which seriously erodes my interest in their desires.

The problem is that if we don't make IPv6 sufficiently interesting, it
won't be adopted. So we need to understand what makes them tick so that
we can address those needs, or create a sufficiently interesting
educational program to overcome the truly inappropriate inertia. Either
way, choosing to ignore them is not going to be an effective strategy.

> The same goes for the preference of some service providers for
> walled gardens, which helps their selfish commercial interests
> rather than the ability of their users to access new services.

Yes, I agree with you here. Our only recourse for this situation is to
make it easier for providers that want to do the right thing so that
customers can vote with their feet.

> Yes, there is a tussle between the universal deployment of IPv6 global
> address space and these conservative forces who prefer a second-class
> opaque Internet. But I'm not sure what that has to do with the
> implied scope of this list.

Fair enough. I was actually thinking that last night's exchange with Ted
was veering into the advocacy category, so I'm happy to let this topic go.



		"We could put the whole Internet into a book."
		"Too practical."

	Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
	Yours for the right price.  :)

More information about the ipv6-ops mailing list