nanog mailing list archives
Re: misunderstanding scale
From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 20:13:04 -0700
On Mar 24, 2014, at 9:36 AM, Alexander Lopez <alex.lopez () opsys com> wrote:
not to mention the cost in readdressing your entire network when you change an upstream provider. Nat was a fix to a problem of lack of addresses, however, the use of private address space 10/8, 192.168/16 has allowed many to enjoy a simple network addressing scheme.
This is easily and better solved in IPv6 using provider independent addressing which is readily available.
Ipv6 requires a complete reeducation of they way we look at routing and the core of the network.
I wouldn’t say complete, but significant. Owen
Current thread:
- Re: misunderstanding scale, (continued)
- Re: misunderstanding scale Timothy Morizot (Mar 23)
- Re: misunderstanding scale Michael Thomas (Mar 23)
- Re: misunderstanding scale Timothy Morizot (Mar 23)
- Re: misunderstanding scale Mike Hale (Mar 23)
- Re: misunderstanding scale Timothy Morizot (Mar 23)
- RE: misunderstanding scale Naslund, Steve (Mar 23)
- Re: misunderstanding scale William Herrin (Mar 24)
- RE: misunderstanding scale Alexander Lopez (Mar 24)
- Re: misunderstanding scale Timothy Morizot (Mar 24)
- RE: misunderstanding scale Naslund, Steve (Mar 24)
- Re: misunderstanding scale Owen DeLong (Mar 24)
- RE: misunderstanding scale Alexander Lopez (Mar 24)
- Re: misunderstanding scale Mark Andrews (Mar 24)
- Re: misunderstanding scale Valdis . Kletnieks (Mar 25)
- Re: misunderstanding scale Owen DeLong (Mar 24)
- Re: misunderstanding scale Lee Howard (Mar 25)
- Re: misunderstanding scale Patrick W. Gilmore (Mar 24)
- Re: misunderstanding scale William Herrin (Mar 24)
- Re: misunderstanding scale Patrick W. Gilmore (Mar 24)
- Re: misunderstanding scale Laszlo Hanyecz (Mar 24)
- Re: misunderstanding scale Owen DeLong (Mar 24)