[175138] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 Default Allocation - What size allocation are you giving out
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Thu Oct 9 14:35:51 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <FF9DADB8-29BB-4334-B686-D0A6A25385F5@arbor.net>
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 11:21:51 -0700
To: Roland Dobbins <rdobbins@arbor.net>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Oct 9, 2014, at 10:04 AM, Roland Dobbins <rdobbins@arbor.net> wrote:
>=20
> On Oct 9, 2014, at 11:31 PM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
>=20
>> Nanites, window blinds, and soda cans, I can believe. Molecules, I =
tend to doubt.
>=20
> Various controlled compounds have been chemically tagged for years. =
NFC or something similar is the logical next step (it also holds a lot =
of promise and implications for supply-chains in general, physical =
security applications, transportation, etc.).
But those chemical tags are generally multiple, not single molecules.
NFC still requires something with a unique radiographic property, so not =
likely in a single molecule.
>> I think we will see larger network segments, but I think we will also =
see greater separation of networks into segments along various =
administrative and/or automatic aggregation boundaries. The virtual =
topologies you describe will likely also have related prefix =
consequences.
>=20
> Concur, but my guess is that they will be essentially superimposed, =
without any increase in hierarchy - in fact, quite the opposite.
Indeed, I think we will end up agreeing to disagree about this, but it =
will be interesting to see what happens over years to come.
I suspect that the answer to which way this goes will be somewhat =
context sensitive. In some cases, hierarchies will be collapsed. In =
others, they will expand.=20
Owen
