29 Nov
2006
29 Nov
'06
9:34 p.m.
Matthew Poole wrote:
So, again, what does v4 do that v6 cannot, under any circumstances, do?
Clearly from a technical perspective nothing, problems only arise in a mixed v4/v6 world. Hence my earlier comments about a simultaneous cutover from v4 to v6 being required. My statement that v6 is at best only a partial solution is based on the observation that a progressive deployment is the only deployment mechanism that could work. My contention is that this progressive deployment is not commercially, or indeed functionally, acceptable and that far from paying a premium for v6 addresses some (many?) users would resist (probably quite strongly) any move to migrate. -- Robert Gray bob(a)brockhurst.co.nz