[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Exactly. And the *reason* why IPv6 has 128 bit addresses is because > the designers realized that such losses happen ...
Such losses don't just happen. They are the result of incompetent engineering.
- Re: IPv6 addressing limitations (was "n... Masataka Ohta
- Re[2]: IPv6 addressing limitations (was &quo... Anthony G. Atkielski
- Re: IPv6 addressing limitations (was "n... Iljitsch van Beijnum
- Re: IPv6 addressing limitations (was "n... Keith Moore
- Re: IPv6 addressing limitations (was "n... Masataka Ohta
- Re: national security Jari Arkko
- Re[2]: national security Anthony G. Atkielski
- Re: Re[2]: national security Spencer Dawkins
- Re[4]: national security Anthony G. Atkielski
- Re: Re[2]: national security Valdis . Kletnieks
- Re[2]: national security Anthony G. Atkielski
- Re[2]: national security jfcm
- Re[3]: national security Anthony G. Atkielski
- Re: Re[3]: national security Valdis . Kletnieks
- Re: Re[3]: national security jfcm
- Re[3]: national security jfcm
- Re: Re[3]: national security John C Klensin
- Re: national security Paul Robinson
- Re: national security vinton g. cerf
- Re: national security jfcm
- Re: national security Dean Anderson
