[182358] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Doug Barton)
Wed Jul 15 14:34:51 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 11:31:48 -0700
In-Reply-To: <55A6974D.2010102@ttec.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--JL9XFCn8Wi264pFghioTB6jjT9t11pRXq
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 7/15/15 10:24 AM, Joe Maimon wrote:
> I suspect a 16 /8 right about now would be very welcome for everybody
> other then the ipv6 adherents.
Globally we were burning through about a /8 every month or two in "the=20
good old days." So in the best case scenario we'd get 32 more months of=20
easy to get IPv4, but at an overwhelming cost to re-implement every=20
network stack.
This option was considered back in the early 2000's when I was still=20
involved in the discussion, and rejected as impractical.
--=20
I am conducting an experiment in the efficacy of PGP/MIME signatures.=20
This message should be signed. If it is not, or the signature does not=20
validate, please let me know how you received this message (direct, or=20
to a list) and the mail software you use. Thanks!
--JL9XFCn8Wi264pFghioTB6jjT9t11pRXq
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJVpqcUAAoJEFzGhvEaGryECWIH/RQJ8irEQXyP5Ed5Fw4FgpUk
bAPaJvX8olNTNValC6MUA1tQnAWKfFkY2pXUd/2Y3x3Pn7KSTz2m9vpm/p4yFjlu
c8kOQ9sQHfGiimd235SdR7V+uAHAkOg0IfF7fIdyBpLQXxTLwHBtNjbx7hdL7J60
t/ljPw/4EcFbjpAs5//oESi+T6aZcTWtjjDhIqzOaHsjiSN7jqoig2EGM+DppoKd
whR91iQh5mUClLXhUlxFgUnyvUxPssiCYV/m1MgfPlqXhteubiKhek+UPw+0ayfE
6d5mPlt7ZbwzMn2E+nJs2zS0aLhXcLorv5oR2HHOhsRwgS6DadAK+Btj+uvUZ+U=
=a+J4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--JL9XFCn8Wi264pFghioTB6jjT9t11pRXq--