[111432] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joe Maimon)
Thu Feb 5 18:01:16 2009
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 18:00:48 -0500
From: Joe Maimon <jmaimon@ttec.com>
To: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>
In-Reply-To: <3ABE26AC-57AB-4A85-8C14-27084F1DFCBD@hopcount.ca>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Joe Abley wrote:
>
> Note that I am not denying the faint aroma of defecation in the air, nor
> the ghost of address assignment policies past.
Maybe because by sheer coincidence 2**32 /32 is exactly the same as ipv4
2**32 /32?
Maybe because by sheer coincidence 2**48 /48 is exactly the same as ipv4
2**(32 network bits + 16 tcp/udp port bits = 48)?
Maybe because 2**32 /32's is less than the current world population?
One thing is for certain.
This assignment policy is NOT enough for every particle of sand on
earth, which is what I thought we were getting.
