IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"Lee, Yiu" <Yiu_Lee@Cable.Comcast.com> Tue, 04 January 2011 04:00 UTC

Return-Path: <yiu_lee@cable.comcast.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 8070F3A69B8 for <v6ops@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 20:00:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -104.469
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.469 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-3.334, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, 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 TkEJPT286W+p for <v6ops@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 20:00:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cable.comcast.com (copdcimo01.potomac.co.ndcwest.comcast.net [76.96.32.251]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 868033A69B5 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 20:00:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ([24.40.55.41]) by copdcimo01.cable.comcast.com with ESMTP with TLS id 5503630.20879423; Mon, 03 Jan 2011 21:12:15 -0700
Received: from PACDCEXMB05.cable.comcast.com ([fe80::a5b0:e5c4:df1b:2367]) by PACDCEXHUB02.cable.comcast.com ([fe80::11d4:f530:37a0:9f4e%12]) with mapi id 14.01.0270.001; Mon, 3 Jan 2011 23:02:10 -0500
From: "Lee, Yiu" <Yiu_Lee@Cable.Comcast.com>
To: Tom Taylor <tom111.taylor@bell.net>
Thread-Topic: [v6ops] A good "state of the art" overview of IPv6 Transition from FCC
Thread-Index: AQHLq8B1KJpvCMSBwkS+8cpcTTyV65PAgv8A//+tzoA=
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 04:02:09 +0000
Message-ID: <C94805B3.6166%yiu_lee@cable.comcast.com>
In-Reply-To: <BLU0-SMTP250C24317F08549DFE1B1BD8080@phx.gbl>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115
x-originating-ip: [147.191.125.11]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <697737FF8BB5A041A7126808FAAD673D@cable.comcast.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
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 04:00:09 -0000

Well, when DHCPv6 is getting more popular, we may be able to work around
this limitation. However, 18 trillion^2 addresses are still a lot^2.

On 1/3/11 10:56 PM, "Tom Taylor" <tom111.taylor@bell.net> wrote:

>But isn't it only 18 trillion trillion because everyone is getting at
>least a /64?
>
>On 03/01/2011 10:35 PM, Lee, Yiu wrote:
>>
>>> We can only hope that 340 trillion trillion trillion is enough for a
>>> while...
>>>
>>>
>>> Amen!
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> v6ops mailing list
>> v6ops@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>>
>>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email