Re: IPv6 Ignorance

[Cutler James R <james.cutler () consultant com>]

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.
> > >
> > > Jason
> > Practical 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 com
> Considering 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.
>
> Jason

Recent 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.