[137122] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Looking for an IPv6 naysayer...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (George Herbert)
Wed Feb 9 15:19:28 2011
In-Reply-To: <616000D2-4434-4A91-BDDD-D50894FA71B0@muada.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 12:17:42 -0800
From: George Herbert <george.herbert@gmail.com>
To: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 12:05 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum
<iljitsch@muada.com> wrote:
> [...] Once we're at 128-bit addresses then we can migrate to IPvA (7 - 9 =
are already taken) without much trouble. But then, 32-bit ASes interoperate=
with 16-bit ones with no trouble and still after a decade the support for =
that is not nearly good enough, either.
I know about IPv8 (sigh), and the Chinese abortive IPv9 claim, but
when did 7 happen?
There's a Google hit on Tim Wilson posting about IPv4 replacements in
an informational RFC from 1993 using IPv7, but that's all I found.
--=20
-george william herbert
george.herbert@gmail.com
