[LINK] www.ipv6.org.au/summit

[Richard Chirgwin]

Karl Auer wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-08-30 at 09:45 +0000, stephen at melbpc.org.au wrote:
>   
>>> If you hamstring "consumers" with paltry expectations, you'll be
>>> building on a self-fulfilling prophecy. Let's not do that. Regards, K.
>>>       
>> I think the consumer has zero IPv6 knowledge, and therefore expectation,
>> until they see a new technology they want. When it's IPv6, it'll happen.
>>     
>
> You're missing the point. The original message proposed the rather sad,
> small-visioned and faintly absurd idea of stealing some of the port bits
> in the IP packet to extend the address size. That was "supported" by the
> statement that it was not anticipated that broadband consumers would
> need many addresses. The above is my response. If you build a world with
> low ceilings, don't expect to see anyone invent flying machines.
>   
True, Karl, but I can't see why the ordinary user should need to know 
anything about v6. All the user needs is "does the connection work?" and 
"do my applications work?" Multiple end-user addresses may well be a 
good thing for ordinary users, but if it's an invisible good thing, so 
much the better.

IPv6 should not require *any* knowledge or intervention on the part of 
the end user - but here the problem is that nobody's mandated support or 
upgradeability in CPE; so at the consumer end, the rollout speed is 
limited by the replacement rate of modems. That was dumb, considering 
that v6 already existed when the world started buying ADSL modems.

And yes, I agree that the 'use port bits' proposal is silly.

RC
> Regards, K.
>
>