R&D or Marketing When 32/34/36 vs. 48 vs. 64 vs. 96 vs. 128 vs. 480 are Debated ?
Will the 48-bit advocates "win in the end" ? 48-bit MAC ID & 48-bit Locator via IPv4+UDP UNIX Culture has low-level high-performance hardware R&D with a bias toward 48 bits (note the 160-bit packet format with UDP included) http://netfpga.org http://netfpga.org/foswiki/bin/view/NetFPGA/OneGig/Guide#Reference_Pipeline What students are taught makes its way into production? UNIX Culture also has the (Cheap) Functional Box crowd with WRT-54GL Open Source $50 "routers" which have yet to be explored in depth PC--CAT--NAT--NET fits into that basket WRT-160N now joins the party. IPv6-Only advocates are now discovering that 6to4 needs IPv4 to work and it is really a 32+64=96 solution not pure 128-bits Good old DNS (the Elephant in the room) has become a political football yet many features are not exploited. Example: A Records return 80-bits with 32 TTL 16 Class 32 A and AAAA Records are just 128-bit containers not protocol triggers. Class would be a "better" protocol trigger. IN CHAOS... Up in the 480-bit DHT "Routing" Arena you have put(Key,Data,Time) which appears to be a best effort send packet. With Time via only 4-bits one can select Day,Week,Month,Year or any combination. A get(Key) from the .NET returns the Data for that period of Time. Speed is not as critical as ACID - Atomic, Coherent, Isolated, Durable in other words 99.999% up-time, reliable, etc. world-wide 24x7x365. Twitter is bringing DHT look-and-feel to users. 300,000 per day are joining. Some measure that as a sign of success. http://Twitter.com/IPv3 Should users really care if IPv4 or IPv6 is "under the hood" ? A PC--CAT--NAT--NET developer cares mostly about how to program the bumps in the stack. CAT Services are the .NET to some. =================================== 00 - UNIX 01 - ISOC, IETF, IRTF, IANA, ICANN, NANOG, RIRs... 10 - IEEE, ATSC, FCC, NTIA, NIST, LEOs... 11 - UN, ITU, ETSI... =================================== _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list rrg@irtf.org http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
