Probably not directed towards ISPs, but to other organizations. http://fixedorbit.com/stats.htm
http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/ipv4-address-space.xml GE probably doesn't need 16M+ IPs. HP probably doesn't need 33M+ IPs. Ford probably doesn't need 16M+ IPs.. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com On 2/7/2011 10:34 AM, Matt wrote: >> No, it's not a real problem. I liken it to the exhaust of homesteads in the >> past century. You used to be able to go to a land office and ask for your >> 40 acres. Then they ran out. But you could still buy a farm from somebody >> who previously had a homestead. > Very few are going to give up there 'old' IP space without wanting a > high price if at all. I know I won't, any one else going too? Like > most ISP's we grow every year not shrink. I see this as a real > problem. I imagine we will dual stack soon and when the pinch comes > give lower tier users a NAT'ed IPv4 IP and a /48 or /64 of IPv6 space. > I hate the idea of handing out NAT'ed IP space though. Too hard to > tell who did what. My opinion is there should be a very hard push to > IPv6. > > Whats bad is 99% percent of consumer wifi routers do not support IPv6. > That is going to be a HUGE issue. > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
