|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: The Choice: IPv4 Exhaustion or Transition to IPv6
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 12:23:30 -0700 brett watson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Jun 28, 2007, at 11:44 AM, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: > > > Whatever -- it > > exists as a reasonably stable design; starting over would cost us 15 > > more years that we just don't have.) > > Are you saying we (collectively) would take yet *another* 15 years to > come up with another and/or better design? Not so much to design it as to reach this point of maturity. More precisely, I don't see any reason why it would take significantly less. In fact, it can't take much less, no matter what. Figure two years for the basic design, 3-5 years for the IETF (or whomever) to engineer all the pieces (it's more than just the IP header, and until we have a new design we won't even be able to start identifying the pieces), 3 years for design/code/test (in the NANOG world, that includes new ASICs, line cards, etc.), and 3-5 years for much existing gear (routers, end systems, etc.) to be replaced with the IPvN stuff. That adds up to 11-15. I have a lot of confidence in those figures; if anything, I suspect that I'm being too optimistic. IPv6 isn't what I wanted it to be (and I was on the IPng directorate). That said, it's what we have, and I think we *really* need something with a lot more address space. --Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
|