Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size
On 26/09/2013 09:52, bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote: sounds just like folks in 1985, talking about IPv4... Most people here were probably not of working age in 1985 ;-)
Fwd: minimum IPv6 announcement size
*Beer* - sorry to take this further off topic. Regards Alexander Alexander Neilson Neilson Productions Limited alexan...@neilson.net.nz 021 329 681 022 456 2326 Begin forwarded message: From: Ben ben+na...@list-subs.com Subject: Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size Date: 1 October 2013 1:05:01 AM NZDT To: nanog@nanog.org On 26/09/2013 09:52, bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote: sounds just like folks in 1985, talking about IPv4... Most people here were probably not of working age in 1985 ;-) Working age?? some of us weren't even born yet. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Randy Bush ra...@psg.com wrote: sounds just like folks in 1985, talking about IPv4... The foundation of that, though, was ignorance of address space exhaustion. no. ipv4 was the second time, not the first Hi Randy, The first time they had 256 addresses (8 bits) right? That's where the original /8 assignments in IPv4 came from, the folks listed back in RFC 758 who had an IP address before IPv4. IPv4 jumped from 8 bits to 32 bits. Which when you think about it is the same ratio as jumping from 32 bits to 128 bits. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin her...@dirtside.com b...@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. .. Web: http://bill.herrin.us/ Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size
On Mon, 30 Sep 2013 13:05:01 +0100, Ben said: Most people here were probably not of working age in 1985 ;-) All you kids, get off my Proteon! :) pgp6RpOt1bBpB.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: minimum IPv6 announcement size
Stop, you're giving me nightmares! Paul Lustgraafgr...@iastate.edu Change is inevitable. Progress is not. Network Engineer, Iowa State University IT Services 515-294-0324 -Original Message- From: valdis.kletni...@vt.edu [mailto:valdis.kletni...@vt.edu] Sent: Monday, September 30, 2013 9:41 AM To: Ben Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size On Mon, 30 Sep 2013 13:05:01 +0100, Ben said: Most people here were probably not of working age in 1985 ;-) All you kids, get off my Proteon! :)
Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 9:32 AM, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote: snip IPv4 jumped from 8 bits to 32 bits. Which when you think about it is the same ratio as jumping from 32 bits to 128 bits. Only insofar as the jump from 1 to 1000 is the same as the jump from 1000 is to 100 ... :) /TJ
Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 10:46 AM, TJ trej...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 9:32 AM, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote: IPv4 jumped from 8 bits to 32 bits. Which when you think about it is the same ratio as jumping from 32 bits to 128 bits. Only insofar as the jump from 1 to 1000 is the same as the jump from 1000 is to 100 ... :) If we're on an exponential growth curve, it's the same ratio. Are we? Regards, Bill Herrin -- William D. Herrin her...@dirtside.com b...@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. .. Web: http://bill.herrin.us/ Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 11:27:26AM -0400, William Herrin wrote: On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 10:46 AM, TJ trej...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 9:32 AM, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote: IPv4 jumped from 8 bits to 32 bits. Which when you think about it is the same ratio as jumping from 32 bits to 128 bits. Only insofar as the jump from 1 to 1000 is the same as the jump from 1000 is to 100 ... :) If we're on an exponential growth curve, it's the same ratio. Are we? Regards, Bill Herrin sure... and I appreciate you advertizing all that unused dark space for me to hide my spam return addresses in. grateful you have enough bandwidth to absorb the incoming DDoS packets for non-existent hosts. profound thanks. /bill
Re: Filter-based routing table management (was: Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size)
On Sep 29, 2013, at 12:49 AM, Blake Dunlap iki...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, I was lazy in most of the adaptation, but I think it serves a good starting point for market based suggestions to the route slot problem. Your post advocates a (X) technical ( ) legislative (X) market-based ( ) vigilante approach to fighting spam^H^H^H^H route deaggregation. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. ... There's actually no new technology involved, and you're overlooking the fact that there already _is_ market operating when it comes to routing table slots - try asking your ISP if they'll accept and propagate more specifics and your answer is going based on imputed worth to them as a customer... you just have no visibility into their assessment of your value, nor any way to make the judgement yourself and pay accordingly. FYI, /John
Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size
...and leave my BN alone, please - go play with the AGS From: valdis.kletni...@vt.edu valdis.kletni...@vt.edu To: Ben ben+na...@list-subs.com Cc: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Monday, September 30, 2013 7:40 AM Subject: Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size On Mon, 30 Sep 2013 13:05:01 +0100, Ben said: Most people here were probably not of working age in 1985 ;-) All you kids, get off my Proteon! :)
Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size
On 9/27/2013 1:10 AM, Ryan McIntosh wrote: I don't respond to many of these threads but I have to say I've contested this one too only to have to beaten into my head that a /64 is appropriate.. it still hasn't stuck, but unfortunately rfc's for other protocols depend on the blocks to now be a /64.. It's a waste, even if we're planning for the future, no one house needs a /64 sitting on their lan.. or at least none I can sensibly think of o_O. Are you accounting for connections to your refrigerator, water heater, razor, vibrator, and on down to list so the gubermint can tell they when you can use power for them? -- Requiescas in pace o email Two identifying characteristics of System Administrators: Ex turpi causa non oritur actio Infallibility, and the ability to learn from their mistakes. (Adapted from Stephen Pinker)
