nanog mailing list archives
Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures)
From: borg () uu3 net
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 10:52:03 +0200 (CEST)
So, I assume you have PI IPv6 space and doing BGP with HE? In other case, if anything will happen to HE (they close they tunnelbroker service) you will have to renumber. ---------- Original message ---------- From: Javier J <javier () advancedmachines us> To: borg () uu3 net Cc: nanog <nanog () nanog org> Subject: Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures) Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2021 13:57:20 -0400 I've had an IPV6 tunnel from Hurricane Electric for 10+ years I think. IPv4 will probably live as it does now in my network, mostly for management / interserver coms for legacy hardware/software that doesn't support ipv6. On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 5:31 PM <borg () uu3 net> wrote:
Oh, sorry to disappoint you, but they are not missing anything.. Internet become a consumer product where data is provided by large corporations similary to TV now. Your avarage Joe consumer does NOT care about NAT and that he cant run services or he does NOT have full e2e communication. Yes, you are right, NAT was a second class internet for a while but now it seems that we cannot live without it anymore :) I dont really see other way how I can connect LAN to internet now. Using public IPs? Thats so terrible idea. How can I be el-cheappo dual-homed then? ---------- Original message ---------- From: Mark Andrews <marka () isc org> To: Andy Ringsmuth <andy () andyring com> Cc: Grant Taylor via NANOG <nanog () nanog org> Subject: Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures) Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2021 08:00:38 +1100 There are more smart phones in use in the world today the world than can be addressed by IPv4. Complaining about lack of IPv6 deployment has been legitimate for a long time. Telcos shouldn˙˙t have to deploy NATs. Homes shouldn˙˙t have to deploy NATs. Businesses shouldn˙˙t have to deploy NATs. NATs produce a second class Internet. We have had to lived with a second class Internet for so long that most don˙˙t know what they are missing. -- Mark Andrews
Current thread:
- internet futures Randy Bush (Mar 26)
- Re: internet futures Mark Tinka (Mar 26)
- 10 years from now... (was: internet futures) Michael Thomas (Mar 26)
- Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures) Andy Ringsmuth (Mar 26)
- Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures) Mark Andrews (Mar 26)
- Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures) borg (Mar 26)
- Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures) Mark Tinka (Mar 26)
- Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures) Michael Thomas (Mar 26)
- Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures) Javier J (Mar 29)
- Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures) borg (Mar 30)
- Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures) Javier J (Mar 30)
- Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures) Stephen Frost (Mar 30)
- 10 years from now... (was: internet futures) Michael Thomas (Mar 26)
- Re: internet futures Mark Tinka (Mar 26)
- Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures) Robert L Mathews (Mar 26)
- Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures) Mark Tinka (Mar 26)
- Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures) Michael Thomas (Mar 26)
- Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures) Mark Tinka (Mar 26)
- Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures) Mark Tinka (Mar 26)
- Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures) Valdis Klētnieks (Mar 27)
- Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures) Michael Thomas (Mar 27)
- Re: 10 years from now... (was: internet futures) scott (Mar 27)