IPv6 Ignorance

Cutler James R james.cutler at consultant.com
Tue Sep 18 17:07:15 UTC 2012


On Sep 18, 2012, at 12:57 PM, Jason Baugher <jason at thebaughers.com> wrote:
> On 9/18/2012 11:47 AM, Cutler James R wrote:
>> On Sep 18, 2012, at 12:38 PM, Jason Baugher <jason at thebaughers.com> wrote:
>>> What about network-based objects outside of our orbit? If we're talking about IPv6 in the long-term, I think we have to assume we'll have networked devices on the moon or at other locations in space.
>>> 
>>> Jason
>> Practical considerations (mostly latency issues) tend to minimize real-time point-to-point connections in these scenarios.  I would expect that messaging/relay gateways would play a significant role in Really-Wide Area Networking.  This would move inter-networking largely to an application layer, not the network layer. Thus, worrying about Layer 3 addressing limits is probably moot and just a fun waste of NANOG list bandwidth.
>> 
>> 
>> James R. Cutler
>> james.cutler at consultant.com
>> 
> Considering the rather extensive discussion on this list of using quantum entanglement as a possible future communications medium that would nearly eliminate latency, I don't see how my comment is moot or a waste.
> 
> Jason

Recent work (http://www.quantum.at/quest) has not yet established success over interplanetary distances.  Other recent results from aircraft (http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/136312-first-air-to-ground-quantum-network-created-transmits-quantum-crypto-keys) show throughput results in relatively small bits per second.  I'll reserve retraction for another year or so.


More information about the NANOG mailing list