Re: ISP customer assignments
On Oct 5, 2009, at 1:43 PM, Wayne E. Bouchard wrote:
Whenever you declare something to be "inexhasutable" all you do is increase demand. Eventually you reach a point where you realize that there is, in fact, a limit to the inexhaustable resource.
This is where I think there is a major disconnect on IPv6. The size of the pool is just so large that people just can't wrap their heads around it. 2^128 is enough space for every man, woman and child on the planet to have around 4 billion /64s to themselves. Even if we assume everyone might possibly need say 10 /64s per person that still means we are covered until the population hits around 2,600,000,000,000,000,000. Chris ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chris Owen - Garden City (620) 275-1900 - Lottery (noun): President - Wichita (316) 858-3000 - A stupidity tax Hubris Communications Inc www.hubris.net -------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 05/10/09 16:20 -0500, Chris Owen wrote:
On Oct 5, 2009, at 1:43 PM, Wayne E. Bouchard wrote:
Whenever you declare something to be "inexhasutable" all you do is increase demand. Eventually you reach a point where you realize that there is, in fact, a limit to the inexhaustable resource.
This is where I think there is a major disconnect on IPv6. The size of the pool is just so large that people just can't wrap their heads around it.
I think another disconnect is our understanding and expectations of addressing needs with IPv6. The challenge of IPv6 address assignment is to predict what home and enterprise networks will look like in 10, 20 or more years. Do we want to implement an assignment method of conservation based on what we know and understand today, that maximizes the lifetime of IPv6? Or do we want to use an approach that maximizes its usefulness (and the utility of the internet) over the next 50 years? -- Dan White BTC Broadband
This is where I think there is a major disconnect on IPv6. The size of the pool is just so large that people just can't wrap their heads around it.
Why bother wrapping your head around it? Do you count how many computers are in your house? Did you remember to count the CPU inside the PC keyboards? Does it matter? IPv6 addresses are not for you, they are not for your house, and they are not for your network. IPv6 addresses are for network interfaces, physical and virtual, and these interfaces are free to use multiple IPv6 addresses at the same time for various reasons. Why even try to count that unless you are a protocol designer? Fact is that IPv6 is dead simple. You, the ISP, get a /32 from ARIN unless you are really big. You give your customers a /48. If you have a really, really big number of really small (consumer) customers, then you can add another level of complexity and give them a /56. Every time you set up a new network segment (broadcast domain) you assign it a /64. All /64s in one building should really be out of the same /48 unless you are segregating internal use networks from transit service networks, in which case there would be two /48s for the building. Forget counting bits except between /32 and /48 for your ISP business and between /48 and /64 for your network building business. --Michael Dillon
considered top posting to irritate a few folks, decided not to. On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 04:20:44PM -0500, Chris Owen wrote:
On Oct 5, 2009, at 1:43 PM, Wayne E. Bouchard wrote:
Whenever you declare something to be "inexhasutable" all you do is increase demand. Eventually you reach a point where you realize that there is, in fact, a limit to the inexhaustable resource.
This is where I think there is a major disconnect on IPv6. The size of the pool is just so large that people just can't wrap their heads around it.
2^128 is enough space for every man, woman and child on the planet to have around 4 billion /64s to themselves. Even if we assume everyone might possibly need say 10 /64s per person that still means we are covered until the population hits around 2,600,000,000,000,000,000.
Chris
here, you expose a hidebound bias to 20th century networking. please remember that - with few exceptions - people network at a very different level than machines. people don't need IP addresses - computing nodes that want to communicate do. Just for grins, put a unique IPv6 address in every active RFID tag. ... and remember that there are RFID printers that can put 18 tags on a single A4 sheet. Numbers will become disposible, like starbucks coffee cups and MCD's bigmac containers. --bill
The estimated mass of our galaxy is around 6x10^42Kg. The mass of earth is a little less than 6x10^24Kg. 2^128 is around 3.4x10^38. So in a flat address space we have about one IPV6 address for every 20,000Kg in the galaxy or for every 20 picograms in the earth... One would hope it would last for a while :) On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 5:32 PM, <bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com> wrote:
considered top posting to irritate a few folks, decided not to.
On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 04:20:44PM -0500, Chris Owen wrote:
On Oct 5, 2009, at 1:43 PM, Wayne E. Bouchard wrote:
Whenever you declare something to be "inexhasutable" all you do is increase demand. Eventually you reach a point where you realize that there is, in fact, a limit to the inexhaustable resource.
This is where I think there is a major disconnect on IPv6. The size of the pool is just so large that people just can't wrap their heads around it.
2^128 is enough space for every man, woman and child on the planet to have around 4 billion /64s to themselves. Even if we assume everyone might possibly need say 10 /64s per person that still means we are covered until the population hits around 2,600,000,000,000,000,000.
Chris
here, you expose a hidebound bias to 20th century networking. please remember that - with few exceptions - people network at a very different level than machines. people don't need IP addresses - computing nodes that want to communicate do.
Just for grins, put a unique IPv6 address in every active RFID tag. ... and remember that there are RFID printers that can put 18 tags on a single A4 sheet. Numbers will become disposible, like starbucks coffee cups and MCD's bigmac containers.
--bill
well - if we are presuming a -FLAT- space, then IPv4 will last a great deal longer than 2011. and tell your vendors to pump up the CAM/ARP table sizes ... and bring back the ARP storms of the 1980s. (who owns the vitalink codes base anyway?) --bill On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 05:47:12PM -0400, Dorn Hetzel wrote:
The estimated mass of our galaxy is around 6x10^42Kg. The mass of earth is a little less than 6x10^24Kg.
2^128 is around 3.4x10^38. So in a flat address space we have about one IPV6 address for every 20,000Kg in the galaxy or for every 20 picograms in the earth...
One would hope it would last for a while :)
On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 5:32 PM, <bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com> wrote:
considered top posting to irritate a few folks, decided not to.
On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 04:20:44PM -0500, Chris Owen wrote:
On Oct 5, 2009, at 1:43 PM, Wayne E. Bouchard wrote:
Whenever you declare something to be "inexhasutable" all you do is increase demand. Eventually you reach a point where you realize that there is, in fact, a limit to the inexhaustable resource.
This is where I think there is a major disconnect on IPv6. The size of the pool is just so large that people just can't wrap their heads around it.
2^128 is enough space for every man, woman and child on the planet to have around 4 billion /64s to themselves. Even if we assume everyone might possibly need say 10 /64s per person that still means we are covered until the population hits around 2,600,000,000,000,000,000.
Chris
here, you expose a hidebound bias to 20th century networking. please remember that - with few exceptions - people network at a very different level than machines. people don't need IP addresses - computing nodes that want to communicate do.
Just for grins, put a unique IPv6 address in every active RFID tag. ... and remember that there are RFID printers that can put 18 tags on a single A4 sheet. Numbers will become disposible, like starbucks coffee cups and MCD's bigmac containers.
--bill
Just for grins, put a unique IPv6 address in every active RFID tag. ... and remember that there are RFID printers that can put 18 tags on a single A4 sheet. Numbers will become disposible, like starbucks coffee cups and MCD's bigmac containers.
--bill
Ignoring the difference between a globally unique identifier and a network-connected, routeable, globally-unique identifier for just a moment ... OK, so we can print 18 tags per A4 sheet. And a single /64 gives us 18BillionBillion of these - start printing, if you so desire. Let me know when you need your next /64 :) (even assuming no reuse / overlap between different solution sets). /TJ
participants (6)
-
bmanning＠vacation.karoshi.com -
Chris Owen -
Dan White -
Dorn Hetzel -
Michael Dillon -
TJ