[100134] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: 240/4
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Conrad)
Thu Oct 18 14:13:27 2007
In-Reply-To: <200710181449.l9IEnBYg009597@aurora.sol.net>
Cc: nanog list <nanog@merit.edu>
From: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 12:07:48 -0600
To: Joe Greco <jgreco@ns.sol.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Joe,
On Oct 18, 2007, at 8:49 AM, Joe Greco wrote:
> The ROI on the move to v6 is immense compared to the ROI on the move
> to v4-240+, which will surely only benefit a few.
I am told by people who have inside knowledge that one of the issues
they are facing in deploying IPv6 is that an IPv6 stack + IPv4 stack
have a larger memory footprint that IPv4 alone in devices that have
essentially zero memory for code left (in fact, they're designed that
way). Fixing devices so that they can accept 240/4 is a software fix
that can be done with a binary patch and no additional memory. And
there are a _lot_ of these devices.
Regards,
-drc
