Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address space ?
Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Thu, 22 August 2019 09:03 UTC
Return-Path: <robert@raszuk.net>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57CA012006D for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 02:03:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 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_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=raszuk.net
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 0pCexTybv_Bn for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 02:03:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt1-x831.google.com (mail-qt1-x831.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::831]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C6CC3120018 for <6man@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 02:03:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt1-x831.google.com with SMTP id u34so6757942qte.2 for <6man@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 02:03:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=raszuk.net; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=HeyvHiF5oyID1xgX4fDE7kbQpC3lJqD/PTRuo1VzUyA=; b=CpbYPYr9vZ2WHYh6mLKRwTEQbvhnnDjl2LIL4TH9OYUqU5h8BPOviG5bszL91sKzmC kt0ZheDJ06S6E5mm6d3Y4xf37PvbgDEXTb8uflQ0tBrb8w4v+e5pUZkK43C5uJEpbOZH 5KKEHxEoWDk0HMKkrCrKCXmg2hs/DR8dJgkrlhUQ1GDPpZpeYIMbS2uDU8AChGQn6o5T KtV0Yjq5NjjjwJq8x9cm9sGC7xtZZ8FXLoiFCA+ABENUvjW59tSO3BRynQM7MbisvOJ9 hdJIg+sc8JPNBjXYRQ+Th9+gscsSkLf8/hbDfE9D2O7YEwomWY6cnsxwuKn8sVxRqEPS fvrw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=HeyvHiF5oyID1xgX4fDE7kbQpC3lJqD/PTRuo1VzUyA=; b=MPfWjJLMitFv0DzURwAWekPS0eMEAKUHbwXn1hni/ftX70xC5H80A9y35INDt6+WEP zenbgi55iKBkb2omEB/P6dF/BwQ34Vv9aqvUfuV3WUdfVXWFhgvu9KXLbVXztk6z9YU4 hbdOlsfEAWq1XtIv1UNhy9MDwnggovk308s1Qqhw+KBGkOqq6hWF+wIfrfF+BTAl2Wxt WDonkgJdKJHYUC/qsg9xkBzMjbXzswSizTKpyKXtFxMdJkXJv+AXUrA3x8Qr/NGe/IOL S9SgdEeEc7zUgqVj1BFvjpDSudU4HgYA7SIX2eEHMEdYD3kZLVF+M49i29kR/WIbcj6L n8jg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAW9+X95IW8liicVYQC9lln2u6x7dfB/C0J2EgQgJeYBTmVInxP2 dM1PUtZyfy+UjVycC7TXDBchK5wy4PlMa/Kecyn9jw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyBKVF9USDEf27UOr1lrmFWS8k8Eoy8zaQfQWzbz9gZshDQjTO0x512JG7qZkZub7LNsJKdL1JyDIv4iPeb2Lg=
X-Received: by 2002:ad4:41c6:: with SMTP id a6mr20775401qvq.49.1566464595639; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 02:03:15 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAPTMOt+cGhBqHmT3yZVChv-PCMqxT-WPDcDdM3RuTc1TMfFeVg@mail.gmail.com> <4278D47A901B3041A737953BAA078ADE148C2FE4@DGGEML532-MBX.china.huawei.com> <10708d7b-a4bc-f9d8-a644-7c5617f5ebf3@gont.com.ar> <CAPTMOtLyiUpi4L+7TpLePvm=JtpEnw-Yv1NCKvO63_HK2jFnCA@mail.gmail.com> <447e5dae-2ae9-b9fe-baa2-111c028d3b68@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <CAOj+MMH=wb+v137TvQkZ+KxaBobA8qYmvoHkFzEgi9-PP-Lqxg@mail.gmail.com> <df102b3b-d337-8852-c5dc-f7aa4f479d77@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <CAF46EB5-03AE-495C-A85D-73B3A9B7EB02@gmail.com> <ded4f1d5-924b-77f1-90f4-11dc4869a8a7@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <C7ABF067-3376-46EF-BB57-7275D6350133@gmail.com> <7b3301a9-3816-092c-97cb-55c0a8e89e1e@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
In-Reply-To: <7b3301a9-3816-092c-97cb-55c0a8e89e1e@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 11:03:05 +0200
Message-ID: <CAOj+MMEEQPGCSc4GJ4Bcgieojfuo-_WwcZNa7RXjxutPenxveA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address space ?
To: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Cc: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>, "irtf-discuss@irtf.org" <irtf-discuss@irtf.org>, "6man@ietf.org" <6man@ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c6d7430590b0f518"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/uUI0wWIHbTZ8kCeFN_Ao2cQU6FQ>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 09:03:20 -0000
> > Read the paper. The first sentence of the introduction is: > ... > Read the paper. The paragraph is in the introduction. > Do you think that if something is written in the paper or on the class slides it makes it immediately valid and sound ? if you want redundant multicast or anycast service, there > should be multiple multicast or anycast addresses offering > the same service, from which, applications choose the working > ones. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anycast Please read the wikipedia: "Anycast is a network addressing and routing methodology in which a *single destination address* has multiple routing paths to *two or more endpoint destinations*. Routers will select the desired path on the basis of number of hops, distance, lowest cost, latency measurements or based on the least congested route. Anycast networks are widely used for content delivery network (CDN) products to bring their content closer to the end user." And IP anycast is used far much broader and wider then just for DNS root servers. Thx, R.
- Why do we need to go with 128 bits address space ? shyam bandyopadhyay
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Mark Smith
- Re: [irtf-discuss] Why do we need to go with 128 … Roland Bless
- Re: [irtf-discuss] Why do we need to go with 128 … Brian Carpenter
- Re: [irtf-discuss] Why do we need to go with 128 … Roland Bless
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Sam Kerner
- Re: [irtf-discuss] Why do we need to go with 128 … Lixia Zhang
- Re: [irtf-discuss] Why do we need to go with 128 … Mark Allman
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Nico Williams
- Re: [irtf-discuss] Why do we need to go with 128 … Fernando Gont
- Re: [irtf-discuss] Why do we need to go with 128 … Tom Herbert
- RE: [irtf-discuss] Why do we need to go with 128 … Chengli (Cheng Li)
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [irtf-discuss] Why do we need to go with 128 … Roland Bless
- Re: [irtf-discuss] Why do we need to go with 128 … Fernando Gont
- Re: [irtf-discuss] Why do we need to go with 128 … Mark Smith
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Musa Stephen Honlue
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: [irtf-discuss] Why do we need to go with 128 … Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [irtf-discuss] Why do we need to go with 128 … Masataka Ohta
- Re: [irtf-discuss] Why do we need to go with 128 … Mark Smith
- Re: [irtf-discuss] Why do we need to go with 128 … Michael
- Re: [irtf-discuss] Why do we need to go with 128 … Phillip Hallam-Baker
- RE: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Pengshuping (Peng Shuping)
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… John Levine
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Fernando Gont
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Alexandre Petrescu
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Simon Hobson
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Sander Steffann
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Masataka Ohta
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Robert Raszuk
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Masataka Ohta
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Robert Raszuk
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Masataka Ohta
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Masataka Ohta
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Robert Raszuk
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Masataka Ohta
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Fred Baker
- Re: [irtf-discuss] Why do we need to go with 128 … John Wroclawski
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Masataka Ohta
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Fred Baker
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Masataka Ohta
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Robert Raszuk
- Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address sp… Masataka Ohta