James Hess [mailto:mysi...@gmail.com]
Saturday, April 17, 2010 4:27 PM
Oh SMS/MMS do a few things that make blink tags look utterly
benign...
http://www.dreamfabric.com/sms/alert.html
May be possible to send as a flash message that immediately displays
blinking, and that depending
On Apr 15, 2010, at 5:39 PM, Jack Carrozzo wrote:
You can balance over DSL by putting different L2TPv3 tunnels over each
physical device and agg it at someplace with real connections and
such. It's possible to do it with GRE or OpenVPN too, but much less
classy.
As Jack points out,
On Sat, 2010-04-17 at 16:45 -0400, William Herrin wrote:
Interesting; I see similar results for my address space. Two
addresses, one of which hasn't been attached to a machine for a decade
and the other a virtual IP on a web server where the particular IP
never emits connections. Magnitude's
I'm looking at
http://www.cidr-report.org/cgi-bin/plota?file=%2Fvar%2Fdata%2Fbgp%2Fv6%2Fas2.0%2Fbgp-as-count.txtdescr=Unique+ASesylabel=Unique+ASesrange=FullStartDate=EndDate=yrange=Autoymin=ymax=Width=1Height=1with=Stepcolor=autologscale=log
I see the rate of grow is logarithmically linear
And doing guess-o-matic extrapolation, it will take another 3 years
before we reach 10,000 ASN advertising IPv6 networks. That will be 33%
of ASN. With the impending running out of IPv4 starting next year,
seems to me we are not going to make it in an orderly fashion?
hint: those asns have
On 4/18/2010 16:02, Matthew Petach wrote:
On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 10:15 AM, gordon b slater gordsla...@ieee.org wrote:
On Sat, 2010-04-17 at 16:45 -0400, William Herrin wrote:
Interesting; I see similar results for my address space. Two
addresses, one of which hasn't been attached to a
Sure the internet will not die...
But by the time we run out of IPv4 to allocate, the IPv6 network will not have
completed to dual stack the current IPv4 network. So what will happen?
- Original Message -
From: Randy Bush ra...@psg.com
To: Franck Martin fra...@genius.com
Cc:
On Apr 18, 2010, at 5:17 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
And doing guess-o-matic extrapolation, it will take another 3 years
before we reach 10,000 ASN advertising IPv6 networks. That will be 33%
of ASN. With the impending running out of IPv4 starting next year,
seems to me we are not going to make it
On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Franck Martin fra...@genius.com wrote:
Sure the internet will not die...
But by the time we run out of IPv4 to allocate, the IPv6 network
will not have completed to dual stack the current IPv4 network.
So what will happen?
Hi Franck,
Zero-sum game. Deploying a
On Sun, 18 Apr 2010, Larry Sheldon wrote:
Have you checked cyclops and other BGP announcement tracking systems
to see if it might have been a short-lived whack-a-mole short prefix hijack
(pop up, announce block, send burst of spam, remove announcement, disappear
again)?
Maybe I'm just tired
But by the time we run out of IPv4 to allocate, the IPv6 network will
not have completed to dual stack the current IPv4 network. So what
will happen?
as dual-stack requires as many ipv4 addresses as there are ipv6
interfaces, this question is rubbish
hint: those asns have ipv4
And... contrary to Chicken Little, the sky is not falling.
then what are these diamonds on the soles of my shoes?
Sent from my iPhone, please excuse any errors.
On Apr 18, 2010, at 21:28, Patrick Giagnocavo patr...@zill.net wrote:
Franck Martin wrote:
Sure the internet will not die...
But by the time we run out of IPv4 to allocate, the IPv6 network
will not have completed to dual stack the current
In a message written on Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 12:08:23PM +1200, Franck Martin
wrote:
And doing guess-o-matic extrapolation, it will take another 3 years before we
reach 10,000 ASN advertising IPv6 networks. That will be 33% of ASN. With the
impending running out of IPv4 starting next year,
On 4/18/10 8:28 PM, Patrick Giagnocavo patr...@zill.net wrote:
Reality is that as soon as SSL web servers and SSL-capable web browsers
have support for name-based virtual hosts, the number of IPv4 addresses
required will drop.
And if Internet history teaches us one thing, it's that end users
On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 9:28 PM, Patrick Giagnocavo patr...@zill.net wrote:
Franck Martin wrote:
Sure the internet will not die...
But by the time we run out of IPv4 to allocate, the IPv6 network will not
have completed to dual stack the current IPv4 network. So what will happen?
Reality
On 4/18/2010 6:28 PM, Patrick Giagnocavo wrote:
Franck Martin wrote:
Sure the internet will not die...
But by the time we run out of IPv4 to allocate, the IPv6 network will not have
completed to dual stack the current IPv4 network. So what will happen?
Reality is that as soon as SSL web
On Sun, Apr 18, 2010, joel jaeggli wrote:
my load balancer needs 16 ips for every million simultaneous
connections, so does yours.
Only because it hasn't broken the spec further. :)
adrian
joel jaeggli wrote:
On 4/18/2010 6:28 PM, Patrick Giagnocavo wrote:
Reality is that as soon as SSL web servers and SSL-capable web browsers
have support for name-based virtual hosts, the number of IPv4 addresses
required will drop. Right now, you need 1 IP address for 1 SSL site;
SNI spec
On Mon, 19 Apr 2010, Franck Martin wrote:
Anybody has better projections? What's the plan?
My guess is that end user access will be more and more NAT444:ed (CGN)
while at the same time end users will get more and more IPv6 access (of
all types), and over a period of time more and more of
On 4/18/2010 9:56 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Mon, 19 Apr 2010, Franck Martin wrote:
Anybody has better projections? What's the plan?
My guess is that end user access will be more and more NAT444:ed (CGN)
while at the same time end users will get more and more IPv6 access (of
all
21 matches
Mail list logo
