Re:The reasons behind IPv6's meager adoption... (Score 1)

DJB's page doesn't say you have to disconnect from IPv4 to be on IPv6. His point is that no sane person would disconnect from IPv4 as long as IPv6 addresses are less useful.

Right now, everyone is on IPv4 and only some are on IPv6. So how are we going to get to the point where we can “flip the switch” and get rid of IPv4? The only way is to convince everyone to be on both IPv4 and IPv6, for at least a short period. So far this hasn't worked because, surprise, people aren't that eager to spend extra effort, time, and money for a benefit that may happen far in the future, or may not even happen at all.

DJB's idea is much more conservative: make IPv4 a subset of IPv6, so that everyone gets IPv6 for free when they upgrade their software. By doing this, you get the expanded address space but you lose all the other touted benefits of IPv6. It's a sure-thing because people need to upgrade software eventually, and when they do they automatically become IPv6-enabled whether they like it or not. There's nothing to turn on or off—it all just works.

The IETF isn't taking DJB's idea seriously because they think they can have their cake and eat it, too. They really want the expanded address space, which is crucial, but they're trying to piggyback a bunch of other non-crucial improvements on top. And they're losing on everything. I'm not saying these non-crucial improvements aren't nice—it's just, come on, let's be realistic here and do things one step at a time...