[ppml] IPv6>>32

[Tony Hain]

Bill Darte wrote:
> 
> If it were easy to abandon a pervasive standard, we would be further along
> the demand curve for v6.  Fact is, anyone with enough v4 addresses and a
> functioning environment delivering sufficient value is not interested in
> change....net value of v6 today is more addresses.  That's with a billion
> addresses announced.
> 
> When its many trillions of v6 addresses announced and several more global
> layers of integration and economic foundation in the mix, the chance of
> migration to something new is gonna be near impossible. So I think the
> notion of looking at v6 with a sunset horizon of 60 or 100 years is not
> prudent.  Plan for the long, long, long haul.  Then if something new
> begins
> to emerge....that next promise of networking nirvana, where we'll never
> run
> out of <fill in the blank>... and the IS and new way of changing....SO
> CHANGE.... But, in the absence of experience that says we can just
> 'change'
> when things get difficult, prudence says conservation of the limiting
> benefit of v6 seems reasonable to me.  If we are going to apply
innovation,
> then apply it to ways to achieve the renumbering promise, to make a
> routing
> environment that scales so that end-site v6 allocations won't break
> things....

Even the 100+ year phone system is a dying approach. Ignore the technology
evolutions that have and are still occurring under the covers, the whole
concept of a string of nonsensical digits as an identifier is being replaced
with alpha strings that people already associate with the target. The idea
that any modern technology will persist unaltered for more than a few
generations is something worth considering but at the same time poses
baseless hubris on those that attempt it. 

Tony