"misguided idea of someone who's way too invested in IPv4 and hasn't made any necessary plans or steps to implement IPv6"
Lack of planning or good business? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12859585 Raymond Macharia On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 5:15 AM, Jima <[email protected]> wrote: > On 3/7/2011 5:43 AM, Vadim Antonov wrote: > >> I'm wondering (and that shows that I have nothing better to do at 3:30am >> on Monday...) how many people around here realize that the plain old >> IPv4 - as widely implemented and specified in standard RFCs can be >> easily used to connect pretty much arbitrary number (arbitrary means >> >>> 2^256) of computers WITHOUT NETWORK ADDRESS TRANSLATION. Yes, you hear >>> >> me right. >> > > This seems like either truly bizarre trolling, or the misguided idea of > someone who's way too invested in IPv4 and hasn't made any necessary plans > or steps to implement IPv6. To implement this -- which, to begin with, > seems like a bad idea to me (and judging by Mr. Andrews' response, others) > -- you'd have to overhaul software on many, many computers, routers, and > other devices. (Wait, why does this sound familiar?) Of course, the > groundwork would need to be laid out and discussed, which will probably cost > us a few years...too bad we don't have a plan that could be put into action > sooner, or maybe even was already deployed. > > Anyway, the needless ROT13 text fairly well convinced me that our messages > may be traveling over an ethernet bridge. > > Jima > "
