Re: [ga] Re: IPv6 and root servers

[jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Stephane and all,

  Gee, I thought that the IANA directed the operation
of the root servers?  Isn't is a bit odd that so few
root servers have implimented IPv6 given that is the
stated direction of ICANN and the IETF?  Is the reason
so few due to a lack of cooperation from some root server
operators, as I have heard rumors of?  Pray tell, is the 
reason rather that there is significant disagreement, and/or
lack of consensus that IPv6 is commercially not desirable
and therefore some root server operators are hesitant in
implimenting IPv6 accordingly?  Do we or do some root
server operators have a crisis of faith in regards to
IPv6?  Is there a continuing worry/concern regarding
IP allocation in respect to IPv6 vis a vi IPv4 allocation
history and practice?  Something tells me there is as
I have read and heard.

Regards,

Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of
Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Phone: 214-244-4827


-----Original Message-----
>From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@xxxxxx>
>Sent: Dec 8, 2007 1:31 PM
>To: George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>
>Cc: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [ga] Re: IPv6 and root servers
>
>
>On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 10:37:39AM -0800,
> George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx> wrote 
> a message of 18 lines which said:
>
>> Is there a reason why they're not ALL on IPv6 (in addition to IPv4)?
>> Only 5 out of the 13 have IPv6 addresses.
>
>Wel, you certainly know that nobody supervises the entire set of root
>name servers?  Each root server operator does as he want and enables
>IPv6 or not.