[124655] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: legacy /8
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Robert Brockway)
Sat Apr 3 12:14:55 2010
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 12:17:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: Robert Brockway <robert@timetraveller.org>
To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <k2qffcec29f1004021733kab7a6876q26db4194eb665c93@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.
--8323329-516654858-1270311437=:7848
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
On Fri, 2 Apr 2010, jim deleskie wrote:
> Just like 640k or memory :)
But what if I said "640 petabytes will be more than anyone will ever
need". The future might prove me wrong but it probably won't happen for a
long time. That's a better analogy for IPv6.
IPv6 could have included a larger address space, or it could have been
allocated differently[1] but the reality is we have no way of knowing how
future generations will use the network.
I full expect that advances in computing will render IPv6 obsolete well
before the address space is exhausted. Perhaps this may occur in 100
years or more.
Future generations may well have to go back to the drawing board to
develop new protocols to best utilise the technology that they have
available at the time.
[1] 48bit host identifier rather than 64bit, for example
Rob
> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
>>> IPv6 as effectively reindroduced classful addressing.
>>
>> but it's not gonna be a problem this time, right? after all,
>> 32^h^h128^h^h^h64 bits is more than we will ever need, right?
>>
>> randy
>>
>>
>
--
Email: robert@timetraveller.org
IRC: Solver
Web: http://www.practicalsysadmin.com
Open Source: The revolution that silently changed the world
--8323329-516654858-1270311437=:7848--
