nanog mailing list archives
Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta () necom830 hpcl titech ac jp>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 02:04:55 +0900
Owen DeLong wrote:
Uh, no. It is so because on average IPv4 is so fragmented that most providers of any size are advertising 8+ prefixes compared to a more realistic IPv6 average of 1-3.
Mergers of entities having an IP address range is a primary reason of entities having multiple address ranges. As IPv6 was developed a lot later than IPv4, it has not suffered from mergers so much yet. Masataka Ohta
Current thread:
- Re: Redeploying most of 127/8, 0/8, 240/4 and *.0 as unicast, (continued)
- Re: Redeploying most of 127/8, 0/8, 240/4 and *.0 as unicast William Herrin (Nov 19)
- Re: Redeploying most of 127/8, 0/8, 240/4 and *.0 as unicast Michael Thomas (Nov 19)
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying John Levine (Nov 19)
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying Michael Thomas (Nov 19)
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying John Levine (Nov 19)
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying John Lee (Nov 19)
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying Saku Ytti (Nov 20)
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying j k (Nov 23)
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying Masataka Ohta (Nov 20)
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying Owen DeLong via NANOG (Nov 20)
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying Masataka Ohta (Nov 21)
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying Måns Nilsson (Nov 21)
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying Masataka Ohta (Nov 22)
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying Owen DeLong via NANOG (Nov 22)
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying Masataka Ohta (Nov 23)
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying Owen DeLong via NANOG (Nov 23)
- Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying Masataka Ohta (Nov 23)
- multihoming Dave Taht (Nov 23)
- Re: multihoming Masataka Ohta (Nov 23)
- Re: multihoming Baldur Norddahl (Nov 24)
- Re: multihoming Saku Ytti (Nov 24)