<br>Leo, I do believe that due to changing global dynamics that we should not sit on our backsides but engineer a v6 transition by any means necessary. China "will" be more aggressive than the US in this regard.<div>
RD<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<br>
<a href="http://www.marbridgeconsulting.com/marbridgedaily/2009-12-22/article/32322/china_telecom_ipv6_to_see_commercial_launch_in_2012" target="_blank">http://www.marbridgeconsulting.com/marbridgedaily/2009-12-22/article/32322/china_telecom_ipv6_to_see_commercial_launch_in_2012</a><br>

<br>
While the 2012 timeline to launch IPv6 is interesting (and, at least<br>
to me a tad disappointing) more interesting is that they have already<br>
set a schedule of 2015 to start retreating from IPv4.<br>
<br>
I've long aruged the overlap period will be shorter, not longer due to<br>
the cost of running dual networks.  China Telecom would seem to agree<br>
with such an agressive timeline.<br>
<br>
--<br>
       Leo Bicknell - <a href="mailto:bicknell@ufp.org">bicknell@ufp.org</a> - CCIE 3440<br>
        PGP keys at <a href="http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/" target="_blank">http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/</a><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...<br>
Name: not available<br>
Type: application/pgp-signature<br>
Size: 826 bytes<br>
Desc: not available<br>
URL: <<a href="http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20091224/708d14ee/attachment-0001.bin" target="_blank">http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20091224/708d14ee/attachment-0001.bin</a>><br>

<br></blockquote></div><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Rudi Daniel<br>Independent Consultants<br><a href="http://www.svgpso.org">http://www.svgpso.org</a><br><a href="http://danielcharles.weebly.com">http://danielcharles.weebly.com</a><br>
<br>
</div>