[Bp_ipv6] Looking for your thoughts - Section on End Users
Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
ocl at gih.com
Fri Sep 25 11:21:39 EDT 2015
Speaking of logos, I was in an IPv6 conference a couple of days ago and
saw that the logos shown on http://www.worldipv6launch.org/ were still
very much alive, with CISCO firmly using them - including on stickers.
Otherwise, there's the IPv6 Forum logos, all currently displayed at the
top of http://www.ipv6forum.com/
Isn't it just a matter of time before they start getting used?
On 25/09/2015 12:23, Marco Hogewoning wrote:
>> Even when consumers buy a device that has IPv6, and fully complies with IPv6 standards there remains the challenge of correctly configuring the device to use IPv6. There are no interface standards for how configuration features are labeled in Setup screens, nor is there a standard or even best practice for how the device alerts the consumer that it is using IPv6 - for example there isn't an IPv6 equivalent to the 4G LTE shown on cell phones.
> Not sure wether this really fits the BPF at is not current practice, let alone a “best”, but here is a thought.
> Picked this up from some other media this week:
> "Freeview has announced that the Freeview Trade Mark Licence will only be granted for HD products from the end of 2016 with the brand no longer appearing on new SD products.”
> And was wondering instead of adding a logo, could you apply the same strategy here and pull a well a recognised logo off the box for not being IPv6 compliant?
> IMHO ties a bit in to Apple’s “You have to do IPv6 if you want to be on IOS 9”.
> Could you in time for instance take away the Wi-Fi Certified trademarks unless the device supports IPv6?
> Just a thought,
> Bp_ipv6 mailing list
> Bp_ipv6 at intgovforum.org
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
More information about the Bp_ipv6