So you use header compression on all your links, right? No sense reducing your 1Gbps main uplink to 0.98Gbps. The checksum (removed in v6) is already 5% of each IP packet header. Speaking of headers I take it you're using SLIP instead of Ethernet? And you avoid TLS like the plague? I hope you replaced your 15W LED bulbs with 14.7W bulbs as well - your finance department will thank you. This is asinine. On 6 November 2025 13:11:16 CET, Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG <nanog@lists.nanog.org> wrote:
Tell any financial department that 2% does not matter and see the reaction. Ed/ -----Original Message----- From: Marco Moock via NANOG <nanog@lists.nanog.org> Sent: Thursday, November 6, 2025 14:53 To: North American Network Operators Group <nanog@lists.nanog.org> Cc: Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> Subject: Re: Artificial Juniper SRX limitations preventing IPv6 deployment (and sales)
On 06.11.2025 07:12 Vasilenko Eduard wrote:
The issue that 128bits (64+64) are wasted in every packet. Formally, for "privacy". Content providers are lathing from such form or privacy. But it is 2% of the internet capacity.
No one cares nowadays. The amount of other crap traffic (scrapers, AI, spam, DDoS attacks) is a real problem, the additional bits in the header aren't. The time of slow dialup connections where every bit matters, is over. _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@lists.nanog.org/message/GQ5AQ75W... _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@lists.nanog.org/message/3WJNGJSN...