fun fact I forgot to mention: if you use ipv6 on cellphone connections, your 
site loads more than 2% faster and uses less than 98% as much electricity, due 
to avoiding the expensive and computation-hungry NAT process itself, as well as 
not needing to be physically routed to that big centralised server and back. So 
if you care about 2%, you'll use IPv6.


On 6 November 2025 18:52:07 CET, nanog--- via NANOG <[email protected]> 
wrote:
>So you use header compression on all your links, right? No sense reducing your 
>1Gbps main uplink to 0.98Gbps. The checksum (removed in v6)  is already 5% of 
>each IP packet header. Speaking of headers I take it you're using SLIP instead 
>of Ethernet? And you avoid TLS like the plague? I hope you replaced your 15W 
>LED bulbs with 14.7W bulbs as well - your finance department will thank you. 
>This is asinine.
>
>
>On 6 November 2025 13:11:16 CET, Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG 
><[email protected]> wrote:
>>Tell any financial department that 2% does not matter
>>and see the reaction.
>>Ed/
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Marco Moock via NANOG <[email protected]> 
>>Sent: Thursday, November 6, 2025 14:53
>>To: North American Network Operators Group <[email protected]>
>>Cc: Marco Moock <[email protected]>
>>Subject: Re: Artificial Juniper SRX limitations preventing IPv6 deployment 
>>(and sales)
>>
>>On 06.11.2025 07:12 Vasilenko Eduard wrote:
>>
>>> The issue that 128bits (64+64) are wasted in every packet. Formally, 
>>> for "privacy". Content providers are lathing from such form or 
>>> privacy. But it is 2% of the internet capacity.
>>
>>No one cares nowadays. The amount of other crap traffic (scrapers, AI, spam, 
>>DDoS attacks) is a real problem, the additional bits in the header aren't.
>>The time of slow dialup connections where every bit matters, is over.
>>_______________________________________________
>>NANOG mailing list
>>https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/GQ5AQ75WAWRXFYS54QLFQAUMDGCM4QV4/
>>_______________________________________________
>>NANOG mailing list 
>>https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/3WJNGJSN3R252QI7CWBDOTAL37LNQFIH/
>_______________________________________________
>NANOG mailing list 
>https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/ZYNMIDYAXYZMGQJT2VX36DZIEY5XHNYC/
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list 
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/EI7EM7BXCFKDS3WR7HNRLREHECTMUCR7/

Reply via email to