At 08:05 PM 8/4/00 +, Bob Braden wrote:
>Elevators are fundamentally inimical to the IETF, becauseelevators don't
>scale.
an elevator doesn't scale the building?
d/
> They have not been overlooked by those who have been
> working on IPv6 address allocation policy.
What's the solution? Hint: No policy of advance address allocation will
help, and neither will any form of address-based routing, no matter how
clever.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> How many Ethernet address blocks has 3com gone through?
MAC addresses do not affect routing. They are just numbers. IP addresses
cannot be randomly assigned, as they are correlated with routing. This
severely restricts the allocation of the address space.
> If you
> Elevators are fundamentally inimical to the IETF, because
> elevators don't scale.
Scalable elevators have been designed, and I believe, prototyped.
However it appears that buildings don't scale well enough to make
scalable elevators worthwhile.
Keith
On Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 08:05:44PM +, Bob Braden wrote:
>
> Elevators are fundamentally inimical to the IETF, because
> elevators don't scale.
But they are an established transport. We are not suppose to
create a new one when an old one will serve the purpose.
> Bob Braden
Elevators are fundamentally inimical to the IETF, because
elevators don't scale.
Bob Braden
Thus spake "Mahadevan Iyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> At first glance, it seems sheer idiocy to use an open network like the
> Internet to control critical matter-of-life-and-death public
> infrastructure like power systems. What do you think?
Public power systems are not life-and-death. Anywhere th
The USA is the best networked country in the world with enough
redundency to cope with any major network outages. The same can't
be said for many countries around the world - many of them use
the USA as the universal hub. Does anyone know what efforts, either
nationaly and international are underw
At 8:36 AM +0200 8/4/00, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
>I think we'll see IP addressable toasters and washing machines just after we
>all switch from automobiles to hovercars and from telephones to
>Picturephones. According to predictions being made by futurists for the
>past few decades, all of these
At 8:49 AM +0200 8/4/00, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
>Not relevant. IPv6 will be exhausted by overly-generous allocation of
>address space, just like IPv4. I've already explained in the past why this
>must be so. In part, it comes from the subjective impression that any new
>address space is "more
I believe that we are looking at a wireless solution here, and the justification
for building alternate dimension networks could be difficult to justify unless
we have an overcrowding problem on earth. That in turn would open up all sorts
of other possibilities. You can see the advertisements no
>all we need is programmers that remember to actually CHECK that string
>lengths are in bounds.
Lets hope they are X-Microsoft programmers, That should keep all us support
staff busy and in secure jobs ;-)
I know, Its Friday !
Jon
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EM
On Fri, 04 Aug 2000 08:52:37 +0200, Anthony Atkielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Robert Book writes:
> > Vinton's idea has much merit. A scheme to allocate blocks
> > of addresses to manufacturers would be much easier to
> > support ...
> No. This will only accelerate the exhaustion of IPv6.
B
On Fri, 04 Aug 2000 01:26:55 PDT, Mahadevan Iyer said:
> At first glance, it seems sheer idiocy to use an open network like the
> Internet to control critical matter-of-life-and-death public
> infrastructure like power systems. What do you think?
At first glance, it seems sheer idiocy to use some
> -Original Message-
> From: Anthony Atkielski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Mahadevan Iyer writes:
>
> > At first glance, it seems sheer idiocy to use an open
> > network like the Internet to control critical matter=
> > of-life-and-death public infrastructure like power
> > systems. Wh
The world connected
Hmm Now I'm thinking Virus's
/Jon/div
-Original Message-
From: Evstiounin, Mikhail [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 4:08 PM
To: Steven Cotton; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Addresses and ports and taxes -- oh my!
Toaster is much more quite,
> It would really really be cool if the Pub/Cafe is also on 802.11.
>
> (Wait, that will means everyone will stay whole day at the pub then to
> attend _some_ WG for their 802.11)
A couple of people mentioned to me that the availability of 802.11
connectivity (and presumably the wired connectio
> From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=E5ns?= Nilsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > good point... but I do wonder how the border edge
> > router will handle a datagram with
> > TTL approx > 240 sec's
> > ( i.e min time required for msg to pass between earth <=> mars) ?
> > what about jitters, latency ,dropped packet
Dennis Glatting wrote:
>
> On Fri, 4 Aug 2000, Andre-John Mas wrote:
>
[SNIP]
> >
> > Though if the devices already use ethernet, then each device would
> > already have its own MAC address, and the IP address would be DHCP
> > assignable. As stated earlier once firewall/routers/DHCP server comb
Toaster is much more quite, even it takes more time. And all your mail will
have brown-gold colour, while in blender you get everything mixed up:-)
> -Original Message-
> From: Steven Cotton [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 5:05 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subje
we will remove IPv6 router at the venue around 11:30. thanks.
itojun
Mahadevan Iyer writes:
> At first glance, it seems sheer idiocy to use an open
> network like the Internet to control critical matter=
> of-life-and-death public infrastructure like power
> systems. What do you think?
I think there are lots of idiots out there preparing to do exactly this.
On Fri, 4 Aug 2000, Andre-John Mas wrote:
>
>
> Dennis Glatting wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 3 Aug 2000, Keith Moore wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > burning IP addresses into devices is a good way to give vendors the
> > > ability to control those devices, monitor their usage, and to loc
"Dawson, Peter D" wrote:
>
> good point... but I do wonder how the border edge
> router will handle a datagram with
> TTL approx > 240 sec's
> ( i.e min time required for msg to pass between earth <=> mars) ?
> what about jitters, latency ,dropped packets, icmpv6 err msg well
> whatever
On Fri, 4 Aug 2000, Mahadevan Iyer wrote:
> At first glance, it seems sheer idiocy to use an open network like the
> Internet to control critical matter-of-life-and-death public
> infrastructure like power systems. What do you think?
>
I believe:
* Engineers will build any possible feature i
Dennis Glatting wrote:
>
> On Thu, 3 Aug 2000, Keith Moore wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > burning IP addresses into devices is a good way to give vendors the
> > ability to control those devices, monitor their usage, and to lock
> > their customers in to particular services. not my idea of
At 00:07 -0400 4/8/00, Fred Baker wrote:
>At 10:21 AM 8/3/00 -0500, Matt Crawford wrote:
>>Also heard at the IETF: In the plenary session the chair
>>denied the existence of Ireland.
>
>News to me. Care to give me the context?
I believe Matt's referring to the comment that there is one English
s
James Seng wrote:
> It would really really be cool if the Pub/Cafe is also on 802.11.
>
> (Wait, that will means everyone will stay whole day at the pub then to
> attend _some_ WG for their 802.11)
"Can I get a hum on whether there are snakes under my chair?"
--
/===
On Fri, 4 Aug 2000, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
> The mere fact that something is technically possible doesn't mean that it
> should be done.
Definitely - what benefit can I get from my toaster having Internet
conectivity when I will be able to use my blender to read mail?
--
steven
At first glance, it seems sheer idiocy to use an open network like the
Internet to control critical matter-of-life-and-death public
infrastructure like power systems. What do you think?
Or do you think, it is possible to build ultra-reliable secure real-time
communication channels in the Interne
Robert Book writes:
> Vinton's idea has much merit. A scheme to allocate blocks
> of addresses to manufacturers would be much easier to
> support ...
No. This will only accelerate the exhaustion of IPv6.
Peter Dawson writes:
> v6 address space works out to about 1500 address
> per sq mtr of the earth's surface...
> NOW..how many house fit on 1 sqm ?
Not relevant. IPv6 will be exhausted by overly-generous allocation of
address space, just like IPv4. I've already explained in the past why this
> The IPv6 address blocks allocated by ARIN are much
> much larger, so the price per address for an ISP
> is considerably lower.
And IPv6 will be exhausted just as quickly or more quickly than IPv4 in
consequence.
Doesn't anyone ever learn? The same mistakes are being made over and over.
There'
see www.ipnsig.org
vint
At 09:46 PM 8/3/2000 -0400, Philip J. Nesser II wrote:
>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>Hash: SHA1
>
>There is already a lot of work being done on the Interplanetary
>Internet problem. Vint Cerf has lead pioneering work with people at
>JPL on the problem. I don't
> When household appliances begin becoming IP addressable,
> I think we will see a move towards assigning an Internet
> IP address per household (much like today's street address).
> The household will perform NAT for all devices within
> (one street address can house many people, not just one).
Hi folks,
I would like to know , how exactly augments clause works for a MIB.
when i augment an existing mib with a new one, should a walk
issued on the old mib traverse to the new mib ?? This makes sense if
the two tables are in the same node ie next in lexicographic order.But
if these tw
At 05:48 PM 8/3/2000 -0400, Keith Moore wrote:
>The various proposals to burn IP addresses into devices are naive.
for the record, I was assuming that only a lower order unique end-id
was burned in and that the high order bits would be dynamically assigned
based on connectivity to the global Inter
On Thu, 03 Aug 2000 16:52:25 PDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> why not consider all the dimentions, ever heard of polyfractal space ?
Fabricating the router connections would be interesting WHat sort of
crimping tool would it take to make a 2.75D connector stay on the cable? ;)
PGP signature
At 10:21 AM 8/3/00 -0500, Matt Crawford wrote:
>Also heard at the IETF: In the plenary session the chair
>denied the existence of Ireland.
News to me. Care to give me the context?
On Thu, 03 Aug 2000 22:06:13 BST, Lloyd Wood said:
> in an ideal world, airlines don't _have_ differentiated seat pricing.
Of course, in reality, they split them into coach and tolerable. ;)
--
Valdis Kletnieks
Operating Systems Ana
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
>
>
>Let's see. Current patent law says that a patent is good
>for 20 years from the date of filing so I guess Friedman's
>patent expired in 1953. Tough break, Bill.
But it was filed under the old law, so it's good till 2017. I guess
On Thu, Aug 03, 2000 at 06:06:54PM -0400, Frank Solensky wrote:
> Just before the afternoon break, one of the conference center staff was
> wheeling a cart out towards the food area and was carrying a walkie-talkie.
> The voice on the other end was saying, "Hope you can get through, JD: they're
>
I had been assuming that the aggregation would take place
at the "prefix" level of IPv6 addresses and that the unique
component would be in some lower order part of the 128 bit space.
If I have a bad model of that, I'd appreciate offline explanation.
thanks
vint
At 04:19 PM 8/3/2000 -0400, [EM
Note: forwarded message attached.
=
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.
http://invites.yahoo.com/
--- kysi ferul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Casey Farrell, Domain Name Broker
>
> attn: NANOG/IETF/ICANN
>
> 1. I would like a direct answer in the form of the
> written rules on the subject of just "what" you are
> buying when you purchace a DOMAIN NAME ...if, there
> be
> no "UNDER CONS
45 matches
Mail list logo
