[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.


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