Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

[Damian Menscher via NANOG <nanog () nanog org>]

On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 8:54 PM, Hugo Slabbert <hugo () slabnet com> wrote:

> On Thu 2015-Oct-01 18:28:52 -0700, Damian Menscher via NANOG <
> nanog () nanog org> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 4:26 PM, Matthew Newton <mcn4 () leicester ac uk>
> > wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 10:42:57PM +0000, Todd Underwood wrote:
> > > > it's just a new addressing protocol that happens to not work with the
> > > rest
> > > > of the internet.  it's unfortunate that we made that mistake, but i
> > > guess
> > > > we're stuck with that now (i wish i could say something about lessons
> > > > learned but i don't think any one of us has learned a lesson yet).
> > >
> > > Would be really interesting to know how you would propose
> > > squeezing 128 bits of address data into a 32 bit field so that we
> > > could all continue to use IPv4 with more addresses than it's has
> > > available to save having to move to this new incompatible format.
> >
> > I solved that problem a few years ago (well, kinda -- only for backend
> > logging, not for routing):
> >
> > http://docs.guava-libraries.googlecode.com/git/javadoc/com/google/common/net/InetAddresses.html#getCoercedIPv4Address(java.net.InetAddress)
>
> Squeezing 32 bits into 128 bits is easy.  Let me know how you do with
> squeezing 128 bits into 32 bits...

I did just fine, thanks.  (You may want to read the link again.... ;)

Damian