On May 13, 2008, at 2:25 PM, JC Dill wrote:
> Tim Yocum wrote:
>
>> Patrick is correct - the subscriber count is just north of 10k;
>> likely
>> far greater readership considering web archives, remailers, etc.
>
> However... subscribership != readership. There are always many
> subscribers who d
Tim Yocum wrote:
> Patrick is correct - the subscriber count is just north of 10k; likely
> far greater readership considering web archives, remailers, etc.
However... subscribership != readership. There are always many
subscribers who don't actively read every post, or every day. (I'm just
n
Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> Let's think smaller. /16 shall we say?
>
> Like the /16 here. Originally the SRI / ARPANET SF Bay Packet Radio
> network that started back in 1977. Now controlled by a shell company
> belonging to a shell company belonging to a "high volume email
> deployer" :)
>
Randy Bush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> back office software
> ip and dns management software
> provisioning tools
> cpe
> measurement and monitoring and billing
>
> and, of course, backbone and aggregation equipment that can actually
> handle real ipv6 traffic flows with acls and chocolate syru
On 2 mei 2008, at 20:51, Mike Leber wrote:
> Since nobody mentioned it yet, there are now less than 1000 days
> projected
> until IPv4 exhaustion:
> http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/
Unfortunately that won't load for me over IPv6, path MTU black hole...
> ps. 1000 days assumes no rush, specu
On May 4, 2008, at 11:01 PM, David Conrad wrote:
> On May 3, 2008, at 8:37 PM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
>> William Warren wrote:
>>> That also doesn't take into account how many /8's are being hoarded
>>> by
>>> organizations that don't need even 25% of that space.
>> which one's would those be?
>
> Whi
On May 3, 2008, at 8:37 PM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
> William Warren wrote:
>> That also doesn't take into account how many /8's are being hoarded
>> by
>> organizations that don't need even 25% of that space.
> which one's would those be?
While I wouldn't call it hoarding, can any single (non-ISP)
Let's think smaller. /16 shall we say?
Like the /16 here. Originally the SRI / ARPANET SF Bay Packet Radio
network that started back in 1977. Now controlled by a shell company
belonging to a shell company belonging to a "high volume email
deployer" :)
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/
William Warren wrote:
> That also doesn't take into account how many /8's are being hoarded by
> organizations that don't need even 25% of that space.
which one's would those be?
legacy class A address space just isn't that big...
> Geoff Huston wrote:
>> Mike Leber wrote:
>>> Since nobody ment
On 4/05/2008, at 3:22 PM, William Warren wrote:
> That also doesn't take into account how many /8's are being hoarded by
> organizations that don't need even 25% of that space.
Unless you're expecting those organisations to be really nice and make
that address space available to other organisa
That also doesn't take into account how many /8's are being hoarded by
organizations that don't need even 25% of that space.
Geoff Huston wrote:
> Mike Leber wrote:
>> Since nobody mentioned it yet, there are now less than 1000 days projected
>> until IPv4 exhaustion:
>>
>> http://www.potaroo.net
Mike Leber wrote:
> Since nobody mentioned it yet, there are now less than 1000 days projected
> until IPv4 exhaustion:
>
> http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/
> ps. 1000 days assumes no rush, speculation, or hoarding. Do people do
> that?
>
> pps. Of course these are provocative comments
Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> On Sat, 3 May 2008, Randy Bush wrote:
>
>> back office software
>> ip and dns management software
>> provisioning tools
>> cpe
>> measurement and monitoring and billing
>>
>> and, of course, backbone and aggregation equipment that can actually
>> handle real ipv6 traffi
On Sat, 3 May 2008, Randy Bush wrote:
> back office software
> ip and dns management software
> provisioning tools
> cpe
> measurement and monitoring and billing
>
> and, of course, backbone and aggregation equipment that can actually
> handle real ipv6 traffic flows with acls and chocolate syrup.
All,
Patrick is correct - the subscriber count is just north of 10k; likely
far greater readership considering web archives, remailers, etc.
- Tim
On 5/2/08, Patrick W. Gilmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On May 2, 2008, at 6:01 PM, Marc Manthey wrote:
>
> >> P.S.
> >> 10K of your not-so-clos
On May 2, 2008, at 6:01 PM, Marc Manthey wrote:
>> P.S.
>> 10K of your not-so-close friends?
>
> does this mean this list has 10.000 subscribers ?
I've heard all kinds of numbers, you can probably dig something out of
the archives.
But my understanding is there are far greater than 10K mailbo
back office software
ip and dns management software
provisioning tools
cpe
measurement and monitoring and billing
and, of course, backbone and aggregation equipment that can actually
handle real ipv6 traffic flows with acls and chocolate syrup.
randy
_
Yes -- spent mostly on getting management approval.
On May 2, 2008, at 5:53 PM, Deepak Jain wrote:
>> Does it take most network operators more than 1000 days to make an
>> IPv6
> plan and start implementing it?
___
NANOG mailing list
NANOG@nanog.org
Sean Figgins wrote:
>> On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 1:51 PM, Mike Leber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> Since nobody mentioned it yet, there are now less than 1000 days projected
>>> until IPv4 exhaustion:
>
> No worries, the Internet is going to end in 2010, and the world ends on
> December 21, 2012
> What's your plan?
some of the prefered ip4 strategies could be exclusive ipsex ;)
http://www.ipv6porn.com/
or :
http://www.bieringer.de/pb/lectures/PB-IPv6-SUCON-2004.pdf
regards
Marc
P.S.
> 10K
> of your not-so-close friends?
does this mean this list has 10.000 subscribers ?
--
How do
> Has anyone ever figured out how to make multi-homing of customers who
> only have a /64 assigned to them work?
Same way you make multi-homing of customers who only have a IPv4 /32
assigned to them work, i.e., not well.
> Maybe the world really will end, and it's all due to IPv6!
Internet doo
Mike and HE are all over that ipv6
On 5/2/08, jamie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You first, mister chicken-with-his-head-cut-off.
>
> What's your plan?
>
> On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 1:51 PM, Mike Leber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > Since nobody mentioned it yet, there are now less than 1000
>
> ppps. Or not if you don't have any kind of IPv6 plan. Sorry, sorry...
>
Does it take most network operators more than 1000 days to make an IPv6
plan and start implementing it?
I suppose there is always some network running obsolete gear out
somewhere, but their upstream guy may provide
> On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 1:51 PM, Mike Leber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Since nobody mentioned it yet, there are now less than 1000 days projected
>> until IPv4 exhaustion:
No worries, the Internet is going to end in 2010, and the world ends on
December 21, 2012. I don't think we'll be nee
On May 2, 2008, at 5:40 PM, jamie wrote:
> You first, mister chicken-with-his-head-cut-off.
>
> What's your plan?
Mike owns Hurricane Electric. HE.net has the most v6 routes, peering,
and pretty much any other metric you can dream up. His .sig says
"Wholesale IPv4 and IPv6 Transit". What d
You first, mister chicken-with-his-head-cut-off.
What's your plan?
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 1:51 PM, Mike Leber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Since nobody mentioned it yet, there are now less than 1000 days projected
> until IPv4 exhaustion:
>
> http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/
>
> Do you have
Since nobody mentioned it yet, there are now less than 1000 days projected
until IPv4 exhaustion:
http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/
Do you have an IPv6 plan?
How long do you think it will be until Sarbanes Oxley and SAS 70 auditors
start requiring disclosure of IPv4 exhaustion as a business co
27 matches
Mail list logo
