[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
No Subject
At 10:03 PM 2/13/96 -0500, Adam Shostack wrote:
> IP addresses are a scarce resource today. Try getting a /16
>allocation (what used to be a class B). There are politics in the
>process already.
I know they are getting scarce. I just find the "let's sell IP addresses on
the open market" do be a scary though. it will make them less available.
> Addresses will not be easily 'transferable.' The IETF is
>discussing a 'Best Current Practices' document that talks about
>address portability. Basically, it can't happen, because the routers
>only have so much memory, and the routers at the core of the internet
>can't keep in memory how to reach every one; there needs to be
>aggregation. The only feasible aggregation seems to be provider
>based, ie, MCI, Alternet, and other large ISPs get blocks of
>addresses. They give them to smaller companies, like got.net, which
>gives them to customers. The result? The core routers have a few
>more years.
A good point. Having parts of subnet shifting around could be pretty painful
from an admin point of view.
> Lastly, 32 bit addressing is going away. IPv6 offers 128 bit
>address space, and (hopefully) much more efficient allocation, as well
>as such useful things as hooks for automatic renumbering of address space.
I just hope that the AT&T scheme does not get put into place. Otherwise it
will be just viewed like a stock split. ("Wow! We have more addresses to
sell!")
The AT&T plan as described sounds like something dreamed up by a marketing
droid as a way to "Make Money Fast Off Of The Internet".
What is the timeline for implementation of IPv6?
---
Alan Olsen -- [email protected] -- Contract Web Design & Instruction
`finger -l [email protected]` for PGP 2.6.2 key
http://www.teleport.com/~alano/
"We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it." - Sen. Exon
"I, Caligula Clinton... In the name of the Senate and the people of Rome!"
- Bill Clinton signing the CDA with the First Amendment bent over.