[arin-ppml] The non-deployment of IPv6

[David Farmer]

Owen DeLong wrote:
> 
> On Dec 7, 2009, at 1:57 PM, David Farmer wrote:
> 
>> Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> Today, though, Vista bombed hard, and it's too early to see what Win 7
>>> will do - but I frankly don't see a huge reason to switch to it, and
>>> I have both Win XP and Win 7 at home and in the office.  And seriously,
>>> folks, does everyone here understand that Microsoft will be releasing 
>>> security updates and patches to XP Professional until 4/8/2014?  That
>>> is almost 5 years from now.  You can be sure that XP will be a 
>>> significant number of installed seats on the Internet until then, and
>>> as long as it is, IPv6 isn't going to be widely deployed.
>>> As for IPv4+, or whatever alternative you dream up, unless you have MS
>>> buy-in, then you can just forget it.  And MS is backing IPv6
>>> Ted
>>
>> AMEN!!!, +1, You got it man!

Sorry, I guess I should have been a little more clear the AMEN was for 
the last  part of Ted's statement, "unless you have MS buy-in, then you 
can just forget it. And MS is backing IPv6."

> 1. The lack of IPv6-only name resolution is not a significant barrier to
>     IPv6 deployment. It would be a significant barrier to IPv4 removal.
> 
> 2. If M$ is going to be releasing patches to XP until 2014, then, why would
>     you assume those patches will never include a patch that enables
>     DNS resolution from an IPv6 nameserver?
> 
> In reality, this is only really an issue if you are attempting to deploy 
> an XP
> system in an IPv6-only environment. As long as you deploy it in an IPv4 
> only
> or a dual-stack environment and provide it at least one IPv4-based 
> resolver,
> things will work with IPv6.

I completely agree, XP shouldn't really hamper IPv6 adoption, it just 
won't be much of a driver for it. I have IPv6 running on my XP desktops. 
  It works OK.  It would be nice if it did IPv6 for DNS transports, but 
it is not required in a dual-stack world.

I only includes the earlier part because I wanted to mention 
DirectAccess and though it could very well be a driver for Windows 7 and 
IPv6 adoption.  If you support networks for MS types you might want to 
look at DirectAccess.  My MS types are already pushing hard for us (the 
Network people) and the security people to support DirectAccess.

> Owen
>


-- 
===============================================
David Farmer               Email:farmer at umn.edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota	
2218 University Ave SE	    Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
===============================================