is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying

Sun Nov 21 19:58:00 UTC 2021

Subject: Re: is ipv6 fast, was silly Redeploying Date: Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 02:04:55AM +0900 Quoting Masataka Ohta (mohta at necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp):

> Mergers of entities having an IP address range is a primary reason
> of entities having multiple address ranges. As IPv6 was
> developed a lot later than IPv4, it has not suffered from
> mergers so much yet.

Yes. You are completely correct. But, those entities usually have
one v6 prefix each. And multiple v4 ones. Because they've required
more addresses. Not everyone are Apple, "hp"[0] or MIT, where initial
allocation still is mostly sufficient. (I believe MIT handed some back
too) Instead they had to ask repeated times for smaller and smaller
chunks of addresses. (Now they're buying them for prices that may well
be motivating people to come up with crazy schemes of reusing reserved
addresses.. )

In contrast, the v6 allocations are mostly sufficient. Even for sprawling
businesses.  In the end, if they merge with another company, each merger
brings one (1) more net, not a flock of v4 /24's.

Your reasoning is correct, but the size of the math matters more. 
-- 
Måns Nilsson     primary/secondary/besserwisser/machina
MN-1334-RIPE           SA0XLR            +46 705 989668
Content:  80% POLYESTER, 20% DACRONi ... The waitress's UNIFORM sheds
TARTAR SAUCE like an 8" by 10" GLOSSY ...

[0] The real Hewlett-Packard made test equipment. What calls itself "hp"
    today is just another IT company.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20211121/0e8a7f5d/attachment.sig>