nanog mailing list archives
Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size
From: "Scott Weeks" <surfer () mauigateway com>
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 13:42:51 -0700
--- owen () delong com wrote: From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> we will have plenty of address space to number the internet for many many years. ---------------------------------------------- You can't know the future and what addressing requirements it'll bring: "I have to say that in 1981, making those decisions, I felt like I was providing enough freedom for 10 years. That is, a move from 64k to 640k felt like something that would last a great deal of time. Well, it didn't - it took about only 6 years before people started to see that as a real problem." scott
Current thread:
- Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size Eric A Louie (Sep 30)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size Larry Sheldon (Sep 30)
- Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size Ryan McIntosh (Oct 01)
- Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size bmanning (Oct 01)
- Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size Owen DeLong (Oct 01)
- Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size Cutler James R (Oct 01)
- Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size Ryan McIntosh (Oct 01)
- Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size Rob Seastrom (Oct 01)
- Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size William Herrin (Oct 01)
- Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size Owen DeLong (Oct 01)
- RE: minimum IPv6 announcement size Leo Vegoda (Oct 01)
- Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size William Herrin (Oct 01)
- Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size Scott Weeks (Oct 01)