IPv6 Default Allocation - What size allocation are you giving out

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Thu Oct 9 18:21:51 UTC 2014

On Oct 9, 2014, at 10:04 AM, Roland Dobbins <rdobbins at arbor.net> wrote:

> On Oct 9, 2014, at 11:31 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>> Nanites, window blinds, and soda cans, I can believe. Molecules, I tend to doubt.
> Various controlled compounds have been chemically tagged for years.  NFC or something similar is the logical next step (it also holds a lot of promise and implications for supply-chains in general, physical security applications, transportation, etc.).

But those chemical tags are generally multiple, not single molecules.

NFC still requires something with a unique radiographic property, so not likely in a single molecule.

>> I think we will see larger network segments, but I think we will also see greater separation of networks into segments along various administrative and/or automatic aggregation boundaries. The virtual topologies you describe will likely also have related prefix consequences.
> Concur, but my guess is that they will be essentially superimposed, without any increase in hierarchy - in fact, quite the opposite.

Indeed, I think we will end up agreeing to disagree about this, but it will be interesting to see what happens over years to come.

I suspect that the answer to which way this goes will be somewhat context sensitive. In some cases, hierarchies will be collapsed. In others, they will expand. 


More information about the NANOG mailing list