[124142] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IP4 Space
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steven Bellovin)
Wed Mar 24 22:44:39 2010
From: Steven Bellovin <smb@cs.columbia.edu>
In-Reply-To: <18a5e7cb1003241914j5f57a64dk5d7f279e25abd525@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 22:44:03 -0400
To: Bill Stewart <nonobvious@gmail.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mar 24, 2010, at 10:14 PM, Bill Stewart wrote:
>>> it seems to me that we'll have widespread ipv4 for +10 years at =
least,
>> How many 10 year old pieces of kit do you have on your network?
>> Ten years ago we were routing appletalk and IPX. Still doing that =
now?
>=20
> Ten years ago I was still telling a few customers that Novell Netware =
had
> supported TCP/IP since the early 90s and it was really time to shut =
off IPX,
> and the Appletalk users were at least running over IP, not LocalTalk,
> so I didn't have to care much, and the Windows people were probably
> already arguing about Active Directory and LDAP and whether to do DNS,
> DLSW was Not Dead Yet, and 1/3 of my X.25 customers acknowledged
> that it was way obsolete and time to join the 1990s (the other two =
were
> state governments who viewed it as Somebody Else's Emulation Problem.)
>=20
> The last time I was dealing with high-end Layer 1 access problems was
> a couple of years ago, but in addition to normal IPv4 and MPLS,
> I had customers running Fiber Channel and other SAN protocols on the =
WAN.
>=20
> There'll be enough IPv4 to keep antiques dealers in business for a =
while yet.
As of (at least) 2002, the FBI was still using bisync for =
communications. If you're a data communications professional and =
haven't heard of bisync, that proves my point... I suspect that some =
members of this list weren't born by the time it was considered =
obsolete.
--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
