[arin-ppml] v4 to v6 obstacles

[RudOlph Daniel]

Hi Roger
Your suggestion is that NAT-PT is not going to be a worker, which was also
the suggestion of RFC4966. So what alternatives do we have for 100% v6
access to v4 and how can we live with less than 100% if the solution is as
you suggest not yet available?

Seems to me that a short term strategy has turned into a longterm roadblock
to v6 progress?

Rudi

From: Roger Marquis <marquis at roble.com>
>
>
> > as it has been clear for over a year now that the transition was
> > started too late by almost everyone.
>
> I don't know about that.  The transition was started in time but has been
> stonewalled by those planning to monetize their IP real-estate.  The
> stonewalling has been in the form of continued FUD regarding IPv6 NAT.  It
> has also been slowed by short-sighted implementors who fail to see that
> there is no value in IPv6 until a v6 node can access 100% of the IPv4
> Internet as well.
>
> The bridge from v4 to v6 has only two real obstacles: 1) a standardized
> version of IPv6 NAT, and 2) a 1:1 mapping of legacy v4 routing to v6.  But
> you won't hear much about these two roadblocks in this forum due to the
> signal to noise ratio, skewed by planning (sometimes salivating) over the
> coming v4 resale market.
>
> IMO,
> Roger Marquis
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20091027/3b883813/attachment.htm>