Andrew, Cell phones. And Cloud. Not Corps. I started some of this, I mentioned IPv6 in a meeting and two corp engineers laughed. You can google it yourself. Jamie On Sat, May 2, 2026 at 12:19 AM Andrew Kirch via NANOG < nanog@lists.nanog.org> wrote:
If no corporation is migrating then why is IPv6 traffic continuing to increase?
As I pointed out, IPv6 traffic increased 5% last year. At that admittedly slow rate, the entire internet will be IPv6 in 10 years.
Further your assertion that business is the prime mover is incorrect. Business will move when they have to. That time is coming.
When businesses can’t get IPv4 from their providers or superscaler, or a vendor or client can’t reach them, they will move.
Andrew
On Fri, May 1, 2026 at 11:14 PM Jamie Thain via NANOG < nanog@lists.nanog.org> wrote:
Andrew,
The issue is for corporate and the cloud, IPv6 is just as broken as IPv4.
And no corporate is migrating go look. Its been the next big thing in Corporate networks for 20 years.
Jamie
On Thu, Apr 30, 2026 at 5:26 PM Andrew Kirch via NANOG < nanog@lists.nanog.org> wrote:
I oppose this. With IPv6 traffic now representing around half of internet traffic, the time to rethink has long passed.
If IPv8 was going to be a solution, it should have been a solution 10 years ago.
In the last 12 months, ~5% of traffic migrated to IPv6. At that rate, IPv6 will be fully implemented by 2035. I'm not seeing a problem that needs to be solved, or a credible solution.
Andrew
On Wed, Apr 29, 2026 at 3:23 PM Jamie Thain via NANOG < nanog@lists.nanog.org> wrote:
Hi All,
My name is Jamie Thain I'm the creator of IPv8. It's not a hoax.
I joined this list because, as part of IPv8, I am creating a BGPv8. Inside BGPv8, two new protocols CF (Cost Factor), weigh cost factors along the routes to produce a better metric. It's a hybrid of EIRGP mixed with BGP to create better engineering results.
I also as part of CF created Sun Tzu which is the protocol that watches CF and gives you a CF score of reliability. Do I trust my partnership with you?
Now, beyond an on-slaught of IPv8 is stupid, IPv6 solves every problem, etc, etc. That's not my discussion point. My point isn't "should I even propose IPv8" my point is what would be the best result for operators?
I believe that since IPv8 solves the duopoly problem, it will replace IPv4.
So the things to know, IPV8 is NOT a 64 bit addressing system.
It is a 32 bit routing system with a 32 bit addressing system.
A Routing Number = ASNs plus others.
8.8.8.8 would become 15169.8.8.8.8
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-thain-ipv8-02.html < https://l.shortlink.es/l/3ae384c1b8e2eb92749595407c5cf9b87ea 3372a?u=12457652
So each ASN in the world will have 3 Billion available addresses.
There is a specially reserved group of internal ASN 127.x.x.x so each corp, org, has 16 Million areas of 3 Billion addresses, to replace 10.x.x.x and 100.64.x.x.x
I'd appreciate your thoughts on it
Jamie _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@lists.nanog.org/ message/KPDE4FNBRLQYZOVF5FUAAGJCBSKNS42Q/
_______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@lists.nanog.org/ message/D3YXYDYJWWH3A7WZZBYSJQAZOMLECQK7/
NANOG mailing list
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@lists.nanog.org/ message/QPBOJRGHJ72YGIQ5BIPMIM4WIXCLZOLA/
NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@lists.nanog.org/ message/VPK4LEVG7XSXPYL54J3OZKBOJN27HWWD/