Re: [address-policy-wg] AW: [ipv6-wg] DRAFT: RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 Depletion and Deployment of IPv6

[Shane Kerr Shane_Kerr@localhost]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Florian Weimer wrote:
> * michael dillon:
> 
>>> This all comes down to economics.  Adding IPv6 capabilities 
>>> to CPE access devices costs money, and CPE devices are often 
>>> chosen purely on the basis of cost alone.  Ergo, IPv6 
>>> capability is bad for business, if you manufacture CPE boxen.
>> IPv6 is a software upgrade.
> 
> Including IPsec?  Doubt it, some of the CPUs barely manage to run PPPoE.

IPv6 can use without IPsec. Also, you can use IPsec without IPv6.

I blame IPv6-advocates for adding "security" to the "feature list" for IPv6, in
an attempt to make it more attractive.

The only real feature IPv6 adds is more addresses. There are a few
simplifications that you can make when you don't have to worry about running out
of addresses, and these are part of IPv6. But security (and quality of service)
is just as easy in IPv4 as in IPv6.

- --
Shane
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHGGPtMsfZxBO4kbQRAp0UAKClQGfgNnZgRm3gCkeicErb9idnRwCgkI62
PXBXY5BC8BXBT8mGY/KCT2g=
=QUMA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----