Re: [v6ops] A good "state of the art" overview of IPv6 Transition from FCC

Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> Tue, 04 January 2011 01:06 UTC

Return-Path: <joelja@bogus.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FD203A6824 for <v6ops@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 17:06:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.092
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.092 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.093, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KHQk-KgxTnqJ for <v6ops@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 17:06:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7595F3A6823 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 17:06:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dhcp-176.nokia.net (dhcp-176.nokia.net [192.103.16.176] (may be forged)) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p0418nI4023741 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 4 Jan 2011 01:08:49 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com)
Message-ID: <4D227320.1090808@bogus.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2011 17:08:48 -0800
From: Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
References: <4D21FE53.5090702@sri.com> <m2oc7x36iu.wl%randy@psg.com>
In-Reply-To: <m2oc7x36iu.wl%randy@psg.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: IPv6 Ops WG <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] A good "state of the art" overview of IPv6 Transition from FCC
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 01:06:47 -0000

On 1/3/11 3:35 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
>> http://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2010/db1230/DOC-303870A1.pdf
> 
> "The Internet Protocol version 4 (IPv4) developed in the late 1970s has
> the capacity for about 4 billion unique addresses. It would have been
> hard to imagine in the 1970s that 4 billion addresses were not going to
> be enough. But by the early 1990s, Internet engineers recognized that
> the supply of addresses was relatively limited compared to likely
> demand, and they set to work designing a successor to IPv4. They
> developed a new Internet Protocol, IPv6, with a vastly increased address
> space: 340 trillion trillion trillion addresses."
> 
> it should have added " It would have been hard to imagine in the 1990s
> that 340 trillion trillion trillion addresses were not going to be
> enough."
> 
> i wish i could remember the quote and attribution that no fixed address
> size has ever been enough.

There's ~10^80 atoms in the observable universe...

some constraints are harder than others to work around.

I'm pretty confident that by the time I'm the age you are now that we
will have had to do something else, 1982 was a while ago.

> randy
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>