nanog mailing list archives
Re: 33-Bit Addressing via ONE bit or TWO bits ? does NANOG care?
From: Atticus <grobe0ba () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2010 00:14:46 -0400
I (unfortunately) cannot get native IPv6 from my ISP at this time, but do have several tunnels set up using Hurricane Electric's excellent tunnel brokerage service. All my local systems are dual-stack, my public access server has a routed /48 that I use to broker my own tunnels for devices (like my Motorola Droid cell phone). IPv6 is the future, and it is coming. As Valdis said, why try to extend the life of an effectively dead technology, and an inferior one at that. With IPSec compliance integrated into the protocol itself, and the hundreds of other benefits, why try to morph an old technology? In with the new, out with the old. IPv4 is very soon to be a completely dead beast, and we'll be all the better for it. This is the age of the internet, everything is interconnected. There is no possible way for v4 to keep up with the growth of this era. On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 11:55 PM, <Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu> wrote:
On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 23:45:03 EDT, Atticus said:What world do live in? Yes, we extend the life of IPv4 by increasing the numeric range. As for "only needing port 80", I'm not really sure where you've been for the last decade or so.I hate to say this, but all of you who are actually thinking about stealing bits from IPv4 headers when IPv6 is already here: Look who started the "ONE bit or TWO bits" thread. YHBT. HAND. ;)
-- Byron Grobe
Current thread:
- 33-Bit Addressing via ONE bit or TWO bits ? does NANOG care? IPv3.com (Jul 24)
- Re: 33-Bit Addressing via ONE bit or TWO bits ? does NANOG care? Steven King (Jul 24)
- Re: 33-Bit Addressing via ONE bit or TWO bits ? does NANOG care? William Pitcock (Jul 24)
- Re: 33-Bit Addressing via ONE bit or TWO bits ? does NANOG care? Christopher Morrow (Jul 24)
- Re: 33-Bit Addressing via ONE bit or TWO bits ? does NANOG care? Tom Limoncelli (Jul 29)
- Re: 33-Bit Addressing via ONE bit or TWO bits ? does NANOG care? Atticus (Jul 29)
- Re: 33-Bit Addressing via ONE bit or TWO bits ? does NANOG care? Atticus (Jul 29)
- Re: 33-Bit Addressing via ONE bit or TWO bits ? does NANOG care? Valdis . Kletnieks (Jul 29)
- Re: 33-Bit Addressing via ONE bit or TWO bits ? does NANOG care? Atticus (Jul 29)
- Re: 33-Bit Addressing via ONE bit or TWO bits ? does NANOG care? Valdis . Kletnieks (Jul 29)
- Re: 33-Bit Addressing via ONE bit or TWO bits ? does NANOG care? William Pitcock (Jul 24)
- Re: 33-Bit Addressing via ONE bit or TWO bits ? does NANOG care? Steven King (Jul 24)
- Re: 33-Bit Addressing via ONE bit or TWO bits ? does NANOG care? Matthew Palmer (Jul 30)