On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 15:14:25 -0500 Marshall Eubanks <tme@multicasttech.com> wrote:
On Dec 27, 2007, at 11:19 PM, Mark Smith wrote:
On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 12:57:45 +0900 Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
Ever calculated how many Ethernet nodes you can attach to a single LAN with 2^46 unicast addresses?
you mean operationally successfully, or just for marketing glossies?
Theoretically. What I find a bit hard to understand is peoples' seemingly complete acceptance of the 'gross' amount of ethernet address space there is available with 46 bits available for unicast addressing on a single LAN segment, yet confusion and struggle over the allocation of additional IPv6 bits addressing bits for the same purpose - the operational convenience of having addressing "work out of the box" or be simpler to understand and easier to work with.
Once I realised that IPv6's fixed sized node addressing model was similar to Ethernet's, I then started wondering why Ethernet was like it was - and then found a paper that explains it :
"48-bit Absolute Internet and Ethernet Host Numbers" http://ethernethistory.typepad.com/papers/HostNumbers.pdf
Would it be possible to find the even part of this paper ? This version only has the odd numbered pages.
Hmm, you're right. The version I originally read was from somewhere else, and that was complete. I figured this one was more "original" as it's on one of the papers author's websites, so I've remembered that one, and even deleted my original electronic copy for this one. I'll try to find the other copy. Regards, Mark. -- "Sheep are slow and tasty, and therefore must remain constantly alert." - Bruce Schneier, "Beyond Fear"