[ntp:questions] Regarding Primary/Secondary NTP setup

Danny Mayer mayer at ntp.org
Sun Feb 22 19:46:34 UTC 2009


Ryan Malayter wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 10:17 AM, Richard B. Gilbert
> <rgilbert88 at comcast.net> wrote:
>> IP V6 has been available for at least five or six years now.  The
>> Solaris X86 install used to ask if we wanted to include support for it
>> back in 2004.  AFAIK no one uses it because no one routes it.
>>
>> It's dead in the water until the infrastructure; e.g. routers and
>> switches, support it.
>>
>> AFAIK, that infrastructure support is either missing entirely or there
>> is not yet enough of it in place.
> 
> It's not just routers, switches, and firewalls. So many *applications*
> presume the use of IPv4 and rely on IP addresses being 32 bits that
> the transition is a nightmare. Things like corporate AV software,
> IDS/IPS, and even line of business apps like financials packages have
> IPv4 dependencies.
> 
> All major OS - even Windows - have had good IPv6 support for 5+ years
> now, but the applications in general do not.
> 
> The IETF did us all a disservice with their transition plan... IPv4
> space should have been embedded in IPv6 space, and the new protocol
> should have been interoperable with the old to create a smooth
> transition. Much like SMTP->ESMTP, for example, which happend
> incrementally over the course of a decade.

No. IPv4 in IPv6 was tried and it created a mess. There were lots of
issues with it, some of which I had to deal with and it's not pretty.
The idea was dropped as unworkable.

Danny


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.




More information about the questions mailing list