IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-07.txt> (IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture) to Internet Standard

David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu> Wed, 22 February 2017 01:07 UTC

Return-Path: <farmer@umn.edu>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCF7F1294BB for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 17:07:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.801
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.801 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=umn.edu
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z5lA4sjJql-1 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 17:07:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mta-p7.oit.umn.edu (mta-p7.oit.umn.edu [134.84.196.207]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A4C741294BC for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 17:07:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mta-p7.oit.umn.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D44AB53 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Feb 2017 01:07:11 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at umn.edu
Received: from mta-p7.oit.umn.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mta-p7.oit.umn.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UHCFOehObP4n for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 19:07:10 -0600 (CST)
Received: from mail-it0-f72.google.com (mail-it0-f72.google.com [209.85.214.72]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mta-p7.oit.umn.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA2F3B4A for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 19:07:10 -0600 (CST)
Received: by mail-it0-f72.google.com with SMTP id w185so207482171ita.5 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 17:07:10 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=umn.edu; s=google; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=YHMs3F2li03QhYYaYtSXODGJGlEfHKIEbhC/e5ixB/E=; b=IKMwY8Jf+4MJJlB4hcozVEhFwi+ubgBFgbHKw6Fnd0BYxAMXP4AdAZZQNnO2aACZoD snRY3zsvLfOAEJLzg2dLL2jJpuv+QxcjpIHnwPM40sbDed/EkurOOaXR84Ic5g8P6ynm jcXFZd7wZQQz+/YjxxdNbtFMK+q0swieTivB4YzE4hrpJoqUyovwfB652UWgH7Pfex1Z 18hbc/A94T9okIh1uxEscv1O3F/B9r2F303hwqMG0mA6H+LNtf1S8KUro5XpELlASiD2 tTx/OydPWGSgujsoU1orZTS3RL7SBrDdhezUKJ5WpNwvIE4F9WT06wlddydRc8bdVE6Y F6gg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=YHMs3F2li03QhYYaYtSXODGJGlEfHKIEbhC/e5ixB/E=; b=a+BZZODU0Aw19HYe/2sTPlKqYSTdQb0LBbCDIf57IV0Rr2K3/wRTKVJxXZN3gYZB0Z EYh1g2kmHlULbP7w9IvL0E+GgBrzW6ouKKlA4nVZJXSnvOVhBcnK5LV4WNil2rfPPJlQ PnJoeS6QFuCwrxp/QlgH3jc9qeksqHfsHa3ZLyAkemE7uPNABt0KJxPutpmuQvSnFCKd qd/vgpeG7YDIlYssMWcX7ifSK1/t5gXzorR8x0rGwtPDz5cAjhHUM1zqC5n/ltr9vF6d qdm8y+u9vRnppk8hmhsP9+OfPI/zJ6Ch6DToZySARLwp6ADT5vUlBKWyBlKjX1s2wOOO 5M5w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39kzPMSWkXdox5ufCs5VamxYPLdzRmpANvw8VYwbBj9hqFKBrRd4chIU4pVwHZHcP/0y+9qzDMvO+npVX/FLIGO14TsSCKaENlJ+04HUNS8wprPetOxkXPsWJtjOvFQ=
X-Received: by 10.107.9.96 with SMTP id j93mr22004663ioi.149.1487725630333; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 17:07:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.107.9.96 with SMTP id j93mr22004640ioi.149.1487725630099; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 17:07:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.38.148.97] ([166.175.58.155]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e11sm179283ita.10.2017.02.21.17.07.05 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 21 Feb 2017 17:07:05 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-49AD28CC-A0ED-4A40-AF00-FA5644496A0D"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis-07.txt> (IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture) to Internet Standard
From: David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (14D27)
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr33oQb=gMGaEM++hLgmMtxMdihiDrUihEsjs63vy8qRbA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2017 19:07:03 -0600
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <55B2855A-5E96-4A6A-BAE0-CAC24191E792@umn.edu>
References: <05FD5283-9A15-4819-8362-5E6B2416D617@employees.org> <CAKD1Yr3B+dw83B0+26oUqdVJE==wHUBwoWzfWBJep8f+=uM8xQ@mail.gmail.com> <d9dc153a-61a8-5976-7697-ce1ecc9c8f3f@gmail.com> <4AF83EE6-6109-491F-BE66-114724BB197B@employees.org> <75196cfa-5476-0c7b-7612-ea2e446fc6f1@gmail.com> <B4A4FFFD-A90D-4C26-BDBD-75555840CA22@employees.org> <m2wpcqeuot.wl-randy@psg.com> <44F7BEDA-CF11-4E1E-BA6F-88794DEC1AF7@employees.org> <20170221001940.GB84656@Vurt.local> <068ce975-8b1e-a7c5-abba-2bfc1d904d70@gmail.com> <20170221101339.GC84656@Vurt.local> <CAKD1Yr33oQb=gMGaEM++hLgmMtxMdihiDrUihEsjs63vy8qRbA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/IKzO2cUrXENoVHmhjSteIAH8JAU>
Cc: 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>, 6man-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-6man-rfc4291bis@ietf.org, IETF-Discussion Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, Job Snijders <job@ntt.net>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 01:07:14 -0000


Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 21, 2017, at 18:19, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 7:13 PM, Job Snijders <job@ntt.net> wrote:
>> I've looked at all configured IPv6 addresses on AS 2914 equipment.
>> The above percentages come from grepping through configurations of
>> thousands of interconnections. I'm confident that other networks will
>> show similar prefix length distributions.
> 
> "Thousands of interconnections" are not really relevant given that we're well into the hundreds of millions of IPv6 hosts on residential or mobile connections that provide one or more /64s.

It can equally be said that the millions of IPv6 hosts don't matter either, because without those thousands of interconnections the millions of hosts aren't connected to each other or the Internet.  But both perspectives are equally correct, its not one or the other, it's both, they are interdependent on each other.  Without hosts there is no need for the interconnections, and without the interconnections there wouldn't be millions of hosts in the first place.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email