North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: [arin-announce] IPv4 Address Space (fwd)

  • From: Petri Helenius
  • Date: Mon Oct 27 17:00:50 2003 
Andy Dills wrote:
Technologies like NAT and efforts to reclaim poorly assigned address space
have a large negative pressure on the increase of IP utilization. As more
and more "appliances" need IP addresses, people will realize more and more
that the last thing they want is those "applicances" on public IP space.


It seems that the Internet will take the "switchboard lady" detour due to misguided
thinking like the one above, mostly due to the fact that a major OS explodes
when it touches the Internet. Fortunately hardly any of these "applicances" have
this OS.

How about a protocol that eliminated the need for BGP, while
simultaneously making every address portable? That, to me, would be The
Answer. Not that it seems possible given what we currently know, but 20


This protocol is called HIP, right? (Host Identity Payload)
Does anybody honestly think companies will commit the capex needed to
implement IPv6?


Yes. Investment in information technology hardly ever makes sense. If it would,
market share numbers of various ICT products would look wildly different.

I know this thread keeps on coming up...but I don't see any positive
momentum for IPv6, and if the people of this Esteemed Forum can't agree
that IPv6 is something that must happen ASAP, how will the PHBs (those who
control the money) and the customers (those who control demand) ever be
convinced?


Because they heard somebody from Gartner, IDC, etc. so say so.
Hell, I can't even convince myself that IPv6 is neccessary. Is anybody out
there totally sold on IPv6, enough to evangelize it to anybody willing to
listen? I mean, IPv6 is no CIDR...


You are smarter than many of them. Like most of the readers here.

Pete