-----Original Message----- From: Owen DeLong [mailto:owen@delong.com] Sent: Monday, April 19, 2010 7:28 AM To: Chris Campbell Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Rate of growth on IPv6 not fast enough? On Apr 19, 2010, at 3:16 AM, Chris Campbell wrote:
On 19 Apr 2010, at 03:52, joel jaeggli wrote:
On 4/18/2010 6:28 PM, Patrick Giagnocavo wrote:
Franck Martin wrote:
Sure the internet will not die...
But by the time we run out of IPv4 to allocate, the IPv6 network will
not have completed to dual stack the current IPv4 network. So what will happen?
Reality is that as soon as SSL web servers and SSL-capable web browsers have support for name-based virtual hosts, the number of IPv4 addresses required will drop. Right now, you need 1 IP address for 1 SSL site; SNI spec of SSL gets rid of that.
my load balancer needs 16 ips for every million simultaneous connections, so does yours.
I'm pretty sure that's not the case for inbound connections...
Depends on which side of the loadbalancer you're talking about and how it is configured. Owen Sounds like he is talking about a source NAT pool. If the box will support a million simultaneous PATS, it takes 16 addresses to make a PAT pool of that size. But if you are routing in the data center they can be private, as only the real servers will see them. If you had a need to do 1 arm across the Internet a single NAT pool would provide service for a large number of VIPS. These are featuress of an ACE.