[ipv6-wg] Have we failed as IPv6 Working Group?

On 5 Oct 2019, at 15:44, Michel Py wrote:

> Hi Job,
>
>> Job Snijders wrote :
>> If the IPv4 vs IPv6 tussle is interpreted as a culture war,
>
> It is war, but I don't think it is a matter of culture. After all, 20 
> years ago we almost all were in the same boat, more or less. Most of 
> us believed that IPv6 could replace IPv4 in a reasonable number of 
> years, and all of us were wrong, because it did not.

you are right Michel, it hasn’t yet. I did not have any number of 
years in my mind, but I was sure that it would quite long. The footprint 
of IPv4 Internet (including OS, devices, software, networks, …) is so 
so large, that it sure will take a loooooong time. Cobol is still in 
use… I don’t think IPv4 will be dead in my lifetime. But that does 
not mean we should not be working on its replacement to sustain the 
growth. To me IPv6 is the only viable solution. It has gone through 
pretty hard infancy, but is improving. Many of its great new ideas has 
been almost abandonned, but the larger address space remains a clear win 
over IPv4.

To me, this whole discussion is moot. IPv6 has not yet took over IPv4 
yet. But that does not mean we shall not continue working on improving 
IPv6 and deploying it and use it. Up to now, I have only see an increase 
of the number of nodes/trafic over IPv6, by any metric or monitoring 
system I’ve seen. The increase rate is not as most of us would like to 
be, but still positive. To me, if we see a decrease of usage of IPv6 
over some significant period of time, then we shall discuss about the 
failing of IPv6. But we are not yet there.

Regards, Marc.


>
> It have become a war because of money, and the outcome will be decided 
> by money, not by ideals. There are people who have admitted that, and 
> people who have not and keep waging the war as they could still win 
> it.
>
> Time to be nice has come, and gone. The IPv6 camp has clearly stated 
> that their goal is to win the war. Battle time.
>
> Michel.