[121756] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Using /126 for IPv6 router links
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Aaron C. de Bruyn)
Tue Jan 26 11:23:37 2010
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 08:22:50 -0800
From: "Aaron C. de Bruyn" <nanog@darkpixel.com>
To: Daniel Senie <dts@senie.com>
In-Reply-To: <F6819218-8F33-48E8-A7E3-BF5BCBDD9FD5@senie.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 2010-01-26 at 10:05:29 -0500, Daniel Senie wrote:
> If centuries, how many planets and moons will the address space cover? (If we as a species manages to spread beyond this world before we destroy it). Will separate /3's, or subdivisions of subsequent /3's, be the best approach to deploying a large-scale IPv6 network on Mars? (and yes, a bit of work would be required to make the round-trip times fall within TCP's windows).
Someone's going to have to update RFC2549 to address 'IP over Ansible'? ;)
-A
