[off-topic] Re: Regarding IPv6 (was Re: IPv6 apache)
On Wed, 24 May 2000, Mikel wrote:
> I am reading many of these mailing lists now for almost a year...regarding IPv6
> and I astonishing that ARIN not only charges the same rate for IPv6 allocation as
> they do for IPv4, but more over that they are charging at all...On top of that
> I've attended several trade conferences and Cisco for instance has all but
> refused to support IPv6...they basically claim that there isn't a 'REAL' need for
> it so we won't waste their time on it...So I guess what I am upset about about is
> that if ARIN is charging thus creating a big nasty rolling snowball....am I the
> only one who's upset about this?
>
> http://www.arin.net/regserv/ipv6/ipv6faq.html
If you get more for IPv6 at the same cost as IPv4, then why wouldn't you?
And the costs are for keeping ARIN running as well as (originally thought)
a deterrent against waste.
As for Cisco, they've been having an IPv6 beta for almost 2 years running,
which just got publically released:
http://www.cisco.com/ipv6/
I've been using that code since November, and it's been pretty good.
Remember, Cisco listens to the market, which mainly compromises of big
ISP's. These guys are the ones telling Cisco that they don't want it
because they have no customers asking for it. If you talk to them, their
response has been and still is: Get a life. So there's a catch-22.
If IPv6 is to succeed, there has to be demand for it, and in order for
there to be demand for IPv6, there has to be a need for that protocol that
only applications can satisfy.
wfms
Reply to: