How to force rapid ipv6 adoption
hugo at slabnet.com
Fri Oct 2 03:54:00 UTC 2015
On Thu 2015-Oct-01 18:28:52 -0700, Damian Menscher via NANOG
<nanog at nanog.org> wrote:
>On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 4:26 PM, Matthew Newton <mcn4 at leicester.ac.uk> wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 10:42:57PM +0000, Todd Underwood wrote:
>> > it's just a new addressing protocol that happens to not work with the
>> > of the internet. it's unfortunate that we made that mistake, but i guess
>> > we're stuck with that now (i wish i could say something about lessons
>> > learned but i don't think any one of us has learned a lesson yet).
>> Would be really interesting to know how you would propose
>> squeezing 128 bits of address data into a 32 bit field so that we
>> could all continue to use IPv4 with more addresses than it's has
>> available to save having to move to this new incompatible format.
>I solved that problem a few years ago (well, kinda -- only for backend
>logging, not for routing):
Squeezing 32 bits into 128 bits is easy. Let me know how you do with
squeezing 128 bits into 32 bits...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the NANOG