The headline could do without that loaded word "big" and the connotations it brings. An easy counterpoint is DNSSEC: The entire dotgov TLD has had DNSSEC deployed for years in stark contrast to the adoption rate among the general population. Complex projects in technology are not all alike.

T-Mo USA was an acquisition of Omnipoint/Voicestream. Seattle is where they started from.

Whether it's the AC's numbers or your numbers, you're both talking about less than a percent as though it's greater than a margin of error in the real world. Export your expertise and let's all work on dotcom next.

Why choose one over the other? I don't care :) So far people have chosen neither.

So, there's OpenDNSSEC to automate deployments; I strongly suggest spending the time to watch the .SE NIC's nine-part training videos from 2010 at Youtube to improve one's understanding: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zl3gdM5tDTo

Some respected members of our community dismiss DNSSEC. This video of DJB presents an opinion: DJB at 27C3

Eighty years ago, alcohol was unconstitutional. Temperance unions succeeded in making dry counties a dry country and organized crime profited. Cannabis had not yet been vilified in place of beer.

Today, Budweiser advertisements can occupy an entire subway car on the New York MTA while the NYPD ensures >85% of those arrested for simple possession in both 2010 and 2011 are black or brown. What wasted resources! What an undue burden on citizens!

We must end the prohibition of cannabis. We must return justice to our courts. We must turn a black market into a taxed market. We must embrace research demonstrating controlled apoptosis in various cancers. You must join me. Prohibition harms everyone.

Further reading:

1. "Cannabinoids Induce Apoptosis of Pancreatic Tumor Cells via Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress–Related Genes"
2. "Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol inhibits cell cycle progression in human breast cancer cells through Cdc2 regulation"

slashdot wouldn't read the rest of my post if I didn't start with something punny...

Al-Jazeera is a Qatari network, not Iranian. The difference is quite a gulf.

Functionally, companies in the United States block Al-Jazeera. I challenge you to actually watch their CNN-like feed on your local cable station. The best I can do is their half-hour daily news program broadcast alongside BBC America and (that wretched) RT News on KCET in Los Angeles; today I consider Al-Jazeera's reporting premeir among broadcast television.

We at slashdot all know it's easy to intercept and redirect DNS (unless you're in Sweden, those fine adopters of DNSSEC), or insert in a transparent Squid/whatev with a hosts file, but I'm confident at least they're probably not using Websense, years ago I installed the mod_geoip ruleset to deny access to daily updates for requests originating from embargoed nations.

Last time I was in Syria Facebook was blocked at the port 80 level. But ssh forwarding 3128 worked fine, hopefully no one was etherealing 53. Funny it took Syria three years to finally ban iPhones, I lost a brand-new 3G getting out of a taxi in Damascus... the one time I didn't photograph the license plate of the car I was getting into.

Seeing "Persian" instead of "Farsi" struck me as odd, but I suppose I'm the odd one.

html5 geolocation tends to look at the MACs of nearby BSSIDs to assist in the triangulation. It's not just MaxMind-style tables of IP addresses anymore, check out Google Location Services (used by firefox). It combines four elements: IP addresses, Cell Triangulation, nearby access points, and GPS. Blaming wifi for misdirection is plausible, but it also indicates that stolen property was perhaps next-door or across the street.

Right? anyway, thanks you guys. Maybe it's time to work on some AfterStep plugins... brought me here.

I do not miss your point, I make mine that R&D advances best with a common capable foundation. Ethernet addressing is static, yet Ethernet interfaces advance. IPv4 has been static since RFC1918, yet applications on it have evolved. People will find new uses for multicast and peer-to-peer communications in IPv6. The methods behind DNS haven't changed much since the end of the global hosts file, yet new record types like SRV, AAAA, and RRSIG can arise because of the sublime framework that underlies name resolution.

I mention an encouragement for adoption because remaining with IPv4 works against both our interests, yours in the continuing innovation -- we can't have IP-next-next-gen until we have an IPng network that bests the legacy IPv4 -- and mine in restoring the Internet to its peer-to-peer model.

"Privacy Extensions" address your concern about trackable addresses in IPv6. Browser cookies are a much greater threat to personally identifying a unique machine as it moves from location to location but nonetheless Windows by default enables the generation of a random host address and on linux grep sysctl to enable temp_addr.

I had IPv6 BGP with PI space in late 2006, so... uh...

I'll also add two comments concerning stagnation of technology. 1) MAC Addresses haven't changed in a long time. Yet Ethernet continues to advance, from coax to twisted pair, wireless, and fiber and from a bus to hubs then switches and now L3 switches. (although where are my end-to-end Jumbo Frames already?). A capable foundation does not hinder innovation. 2) Globally unique addresses in applications are the key. Returning the Internet to its mid-90s status quo of every host being a unique peer enables technologies that are simply painful to adopt today, like SIP communications or IPsec between islands of NAT. So we have created an inefficient clientA-server-clientB bandage so people can send each other images in IMs or actually use their webcams. Once the software developers (yes, they're part of my presentations) grasp the advantages of IPv6 I can't even imagine the wonderful new ideas they'll deliver.

IPv4 is simply unsustainable: at some point we'll simply run out of ports per IP to use for PAT. IPv6 has enough addresses to last effectively forever, through the lifetimes of people born today. Versus the status quo, where each person on earth has about half of an IP address if you consider the overhead of VLSM, not enough to cover my mobile phone, my SIP phone, my iPod, my iMac, my MacBook, my colocated servers, nevermind all the nerds in India or China... Would people adopt IPv6 faster if they saw it as a matter of social justice and equal access to technology for all the children of the earth?

(P.S. Everyone please hire me and some of my friends to teach IPv6 classes at your organization and organize your deployment. Thanks)

People on earth: Six billion.
IPv4 addresses: Four billion.

Not counting network addresses, broadcast addresses, and all the CIDR things.

Why do I deserve globally routable addresses but other people don't?