nanog mailing list archives
Re: 97.128.0.0/9 allocation to verizon wireless
From: Joel Esler <eslerj () gmail com>
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 10:19:10 -0500
Exactly. On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Joel Jaeggli <joelja () bogus com> wrote:
Eliot Lear wrote:On 2/8/09 3:24 AM, Jeff S Wheeler wrote:Sure, smart phones are becoming more popular. It's reasonable to assume that virtually all cell phones will eventually have an IP address almost all the time.The numbers I keep seeing for so-called "smartphones" in the press for U.S. and Europe are 49% and 50% within two years, respectively. Here's an article you might find interesting about the U.S. domestic market, and it may help you calculate what sort of growth rate we can expect in the future, when combined with both of the above numbers. Put another way, the news is bad, but there is a cap on growth.We live in rather sad times if, subscriber, arpu and internet usage growth is considered bad news.http://albuquerque.bizjournals.com/dallas/stories/2008/09/29/story10.htmlEliot
Current thread:
- Re: 97.128.0.0/9 allocation to verizon wireless, (continued)
- Re: 97.128.0.0/9 allocation to verizon wireless Dave Temkin (Feb 10)
- Re: 97.128.0.0/9 allocation to verizon wireless Scott Howard (Feb 10)
- Re: 97.128.0.0/9 allocation to verizon wireless Paul Wall (Feb 08)
- Re: 97.128.0.0/9 allocation to verizon wireless Paul Wall (Feb 08)
- Re: 97.128.0.0/9 allocation to verizon wireless Christopher Morrow (Feb 08)
- Re: 97.128.0.0/9 allocation to verizon wireless James Hess (Feb 08)
- Re: 97.128.0.0/9 allocation to verizon wireless Joel Jaeggli (Feb 08)
- Re: 97.128.0.0/9 allocation to verizon wireless Joel Esler (Feb 08)
- Re: 97.128.0.0/9 allocation to verizon wireless Alexander Harrowell (Feb 08)
- Re: 97.128.0.0/9 allocation to verizon wireless Eliot Lear (Feb 08)
- Re: 97.128.0.0/9 allocation to verizon wireless Steven M. Bellovin (Feb 08)
- RE: 97.128.0.0/9 allocation to verizon wireless Frank Bulk (Feb 08)
- RE: 97.128.0.0/9 allocation to verizon wireless Skywing (Feb 08)