Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Draft summary of public comment (second milestone report) ready for JAS WG review

[Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@xxxxxxxxx>]

At 03/08/2011 05:44 PM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond wrote:

> Hello Michele,
>
> On 03/08/2011 20:49, Michele Neylon :: Blacknight wrote :
> > The long and short of it is that IPv6 isn't all that hard to deploy.
> > Every mainstream server OS today supports it well, all decent networking
> > hardware has good support and the larger transit providers are all
> > either providing it right now or have advanced plans in place.
>
> Ok for the hardware.
> But what do you do when country X doesn't have a drop of IPv6 connectivity?
> Should this preclude an applicant from applying, point blank?
> Tunnelling is not the answer because it's only going to install a wider
> local tendency to delay native v6 introduction, isn't it?
> Kind regards,
>
> Olivier
Transition to IPv6 has enough problems that the fact that a start-up 
registry uses tunnelling is not likely to be an event that will even 
be noticed, never mind influence local or wider attitudes.
Is it possible that this use of tunneling gives someone else the idea 
that they could do it too. Perhaps, but that will simply serve to 
increase the number of IPv6 nodes (native or not).
Admittedly, tunneling is not what the original IPv6 architects 
imagined. But I am afraid that their musings have proven to be just a 
bit out of line with how reality has unfolded.
Alan