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

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Mon, 03 January 2011 23:33 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.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 0C7B83A6D77 for <v6ops@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 15:33:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.423
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.423 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.176, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 9NYrNuEEsUpq for <v6ops@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 15:33:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::36]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1373D3A6D76 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 15:33:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=rmac.psg.com.psg.com) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.72 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1PZtvu-0000qo-Nk; Mon, 03 Jan 2011 23:35:22 +0000
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 08:35:21 +0900
Message-ID: <m2oc7x36iu.wl%randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Ed Jankiewicz <edward.jankiewicz@sri.com>
In-Reply-To: <4D21FE53.5090702@sri.com>
References: <4D21FE53.5090702@sri.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
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: Mon, 03 Jan 2011 23:33:19 -0000

> 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.

randy