Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00.txt).

"Patrik Fältström " <> Thu, 29 December 2016 07:17 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 065C31296E3 for <>; Wed, 28 Dec 2016 23:17:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.801
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.801 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gLETPcOAvCfA for <>; Wed, 28 Dec 2016 23:17:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 663FC1296D6 for <>; Wed, 28 Dec 2016 23:17:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9BABC20260; Thu, 29 Dec 2016 08:17:09 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;; s=mail; t=1482995829; bh=eKDssa/0onSxOew0Iab2Cf+VEXbMQ0t7NBzRE8dW9Zg=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=EbbAwWrLBAvtjn4B1VwxAmJ7zkj1e+KZcyefWmxSr8ED3MK6lA5kjlEXpVXSaYTyg hH3O/AvpPyuL0DT0XrHPQbrarIv+iX3BWhi9YobmbD/8ddg36mP/wG90oVVNbzlyQs y6kKlDlu+cXs0z0zpxH9SMNSwE0rTH9ZWgcARCkE=
From: "Patrik =?utf-8?b?RsOkbHRzdHLDtm0=?=" <>
To: "David Conrad" <>
Subject: Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00.txt).
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2016 08:17:10 +0100
Message-ID: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <049f01d2613f$c5431ef0$4fc95cd0$> <> <> <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=_MailMate_29CB1208-CEE7-420E-BAB3-7ECC94793949_="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Mailer: MailMate (2.0BETAr6072)
Archived-At: <>
Cc:, IETF Rinse Repeat <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2016 07:17:14 -0000

On 29 Dec 2016, at 5:27, David Conrad wrote:

> My suspicion (hope?) is that the increased price of IPv4 (and operational challenges dealing with GGNAT) will encourage folks to take IPv6 more seriously. combination with the increased a. announcements of unannounced (regardless of whether it is allocated or not) address space; and ultimately b. announcements of address space that is announced (as people will just not care if someone on the other side of the planet use the space or not).

I.e. we can just sit down, do our homework, and people will one day see IPv4 is more work for them than IPv6. And with homework I mean continue to improve management and use of IPv6 address space. There is still so much more to be done. Because one day people will come and ask for it, and when that happens we better have the tools ready.