nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 Ignorance
From: Jason Baugher <jason () thebaughers com>
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 12:21:19 -0500
On 9/18/2012 12:07 PM, Cutler James R wrote:
And last time I checked, IPv6 wasn't supposed to be designed to last for just another year or so. If we're expecting any kind of longevity out of IPv6, we need to expect that technology will solve these problems and plan for it. I'd rather not be sitting here 10 years from now wondering why I'm dual-stacking IPv7 on top of IPv6 because we didn't plan far enough ahead.On Sep 18, 2012, at 12:57 PM, Jason Baugher <jason () thebaughers com> wrote:On 9/18/2012 11:47 AM, Cutler James R wrote:On Sep 18, 2012, at 12:38 PM, Jason Baugher <jason () thebaughers com> wrote:What about network-based objects outside of our orbit? If we're talking about IPv6 in the long-term, I think we have to assume we'll have networked devices on the moon or at other locations in space. JasonPractical considerations (mostly latency issues) tend to minimize real-time point-to-point connections in these scenarios. I would expect that messaging/relay gateways would play a significant role in Really-Wide Area Networking. This would move inter-networking largely to an application layer, not the network layer. Thus, worrying about Layer 3 addressing limits is probably moot and just a fun waste of NANOG list bandwidth. James R. Cutler james.cutler () consultant comConsidering the rather extensive discussion on this list of using quantum entanglement as a possible future communications medium that would nearly eliminate latency, I don't see how my comment is moot or a waste. JasonRecent work (http://www.quantum.at/quest) has not yet established success over interplanetary distances. Other recent results from aircraft (http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/136312-first-air-to-ground-quantum-network-created-transmits-quantum-crypto-keys) show throughput results in relatively small bits per second. I'll reserve retraction for another year or so.
Jason
Current thread:
- RE: IPv6 Ignorance, (continued)
- RE: IPv6 Ignorance Blake Pfankuch (Sep 17)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Owen DeLong (Sep 17)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance joel jaeggli (Sep 17)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Owen DeLong (Sep 17)
- RE: IPv6 Ignorance Beeman, Davis (Sep 18)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Dan Wood (Sep 18)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Jason Baugher (Sep 18)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Cutler James R (Sep 18)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Jason Baugher (Sep 18)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Cutler James R (Sep 18)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Jason Baugher (Sep 18)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Eugen Leitl (Sep 18)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Joe Hamelin (Sep 18)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Cutler James R (Sep 18)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Owen DeLong (Sep 18)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Owen DeLong (Sep 18)
- RE: IPv6 Ignorance Beeman, Davis (Sep 17)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Masataka Ohta (Sep 17)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Owen DeLong (Sep 17)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Masataka Ohta (Sep 17)
- Re: IPv6 Ignorance Owen DeLong (Sep 17)