[AusNOG] IPv6 Addressing

Thu Apr 7 12:28:51 EST 2011

In message <BANLkTin1kbywjLi9mcDRdjB74ZD0PS2mxQ at mail.gmail.com>, Matt Shadbolt 
writes:
> >
> > I don't have a perfect crystal ball either but 1000 sites per person in
> > the world will probably be enough.  Home, car(s), person.
> 
> 
> I'll play devils avocado.
> 
> I think that's fairly short-sighted. 1000 per person may seem enough now bu=
> t
> who knows in 30-40-50 years? Nano technology may see us need more? How abou=
> t
> an IP for every thread on your favourite jacket?

I think one subnet would suffice for that.

1000 /48 sites is 65 million /64 subnets per person.

> Obviously there has to be a limit - and I'm sure IPv6 will be enough=99 - b=
> ut
> just because we don't think we'll use them all now, doesn't mean we wont ;)
> 
> 
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Jones, Rick
> <Rick.Jones at au.harveynorman.com>wrote:
> 
> > We are erring on the side of caution - every person on the planet can hav=
> e
> > billions of subnets each, so we can afford to give each and every broadba=
> nd
> > connection a /64 to play with.
> >
> > And I for one will be throwing my hat in the air when we finally get to s=
> ay
> > goodbye to NAT (we loved you NAT because you saved our bacon - but we wis=
> h
> > you well in your next endeavour).
> >
> > R.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net [mailto:
> > ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of David Hughes
> > Sent: Thursday, 7 April 2011 9:38 AM
> > To: Brett O'Hara
> > Cc: AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> > Subject: Re: [AusNOG] IPv6 Addressing
> >
> >
> > On 07/04/2011, at 9:19 AM, Brett O'Hara wrote:
> >
> > > Didn't Geoff say based on current policies, ipv6 allocations may run ou=
> t
> > in
> > > 300 to 400 years?
> >
> > Ahh, but who says things will stay as they are?  How about a hypothetical=
> .
> >   We have soooo many addresses we don't really need NAT anymore do we?  S=
> o
> > how about we include a framed-route for each broadband connection.  So
> > instead of a BB subscriber consuming a single IP address (i.e. their
> > router's outside address) they now consume a /64 as well.  That'd eat
> > another million+ /64's for Australia alone.
> >
> > What else may change that we haven't thought about yet?  As I said, my
> > crystal ball isn't that good so I'd prefer to err on the side of caution =
> (or
> > at least efficiency).
> >
> >
> > David
> > ...
> > _______________________________________________
> > AusNOG mailing list
> > AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> > http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
> >
> > *************************************************************************=
> ***********************
> > DISCLAIMER
> >
> > Confidential Communication: This email and any attachments are intended f=
> or
> > the addressee(s)
> > only and are confidential. They may contain legally privileged or copyrig=
> ht
> > material. If you
> > are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately by
> > reply email and
> > delete this email and any attachments. You must not read, copy, use,
> > distribute or disclose
> > the contents of this email without consent and Harvey Norman Holdings
> > Limited ACN 003 237 545
> > (and its related subsidiaries) (=93Harvey Norman=94) does not accept
> > responsibility for any
> > unauthorised use or reliance on the contents of this email.
> >
> > Harvey Norman does not represent or warrant that the integrity of this
> > email has been maintained
> > or that it is free from errors, viruses, interceptions or interference. A=
> ny
> > views expressed by
> > the sender do not necessarily represent the views of Harvey Norman.
> >
> > This notice should not be removed from this email.
> >
> > *************************************************************************=
> ***********************
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > AusNOG mailing list
> > AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> > http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
> >
> >
> 
> 
> --=20
> *mattlog.net*
> 
> --0016361e7a6641ddc504a049f975
> Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> 
> <blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0=
> px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-=
> left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-left-style: solid; padding-left: 1ex=
> ; ">
> <br><span class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"border-collapse: collapse; fo=
> nt-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; ">I don't have a perfect=
>  crystal ball either but 1000 sites per person in<br></span><span class=3D"=
> Apple-style-span" style=3D"border-collapse: collapse; font-family: arial, s=
> ans-serif; font-size: 13px; ">the world will probably be enough. =A0Home, c=
> ar(s), person.</span></blockquote>
> <div><br></div><div>I'll play devils avocado.</div><div><br></div><div>=
> I think that's fairly short-sighted. 1000 per person may seem enough no=
> w but who knows in 30-40-50 years? Nano technology may see us need more? Ho=
> w about an IP for every thread on your favourite jacket?</div>
> <div><br></div><div>Obviously there has to be a limit - and I'm sure IP=
> v6 will be enough=99 - but just because we don't think we'll use th=
> em all now, doesn't mean we wont ;)</div><div><br></div><br><div class=
> =3D"gmail_quote">
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 9:51 AM, Jones, Rick <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=
> =3D"mailto:Rick.Jones at au.harveynorman.com">Rick.Jones at au.harveynorman.com</=
> a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0=
>  0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
> We are erring on the side of caution - every person on the planet can have =
> billions of subnets each, so we can afford to give each and every broadband=
>  connection a /64 to play with.<br>
> <br>
> And I for one will be throwing my hat in the air when we finally get to say=
>  goodbye to NAT (we loved you NAT because you saved our bacon - but we wish=
>  you well in your next endeavour).<br>
> <font color=3D"#888888"><br>
> R.<br>
> </font><div class=3D"im"><br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> From: <a href=3D"mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net">ausnog-bounces at lis=
> ts.ausnog.net</a> [mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net=
> ">ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net</a>] On Behalf Of David Hughes<br>
> Sent: Thursday, 7 April 2011 9:38 AM<br>
> To: Brett O'Hara<br>
> Cc: <a href=3D"mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net">AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net</a><=
> br>
> Subject: Re: [AusNOG] IPv6 Addressing<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> </div><div><div></div><div class=3D"h5">On 07/04/2011, at 9:19 AM, Brett O&=
> #39;Hara wrote:<br>
> <br>
> > Didn't Geoff say based on current policies, ipv6 allocations may r=
> un out in<br>
> > 300 to 400 years?<br>
> <br>
> Ahh, but who says things will stay as they are? =A0How about a hypothetical=
> . =A0 We have soooo many addresses we don't really need NAT anymore do =
> we? =A0So how about we include a framed-route for each broadband connection=
> . =A0So instead of a BB subscriber consuming a single IP address (i.e. thei=
> r router's outside address) they now consume a /64 as well. =A0That&#39=
> ;d eat another million+ /64's for Australia alone.<br>
> 
> <br>
> What else may change that we haven't thought about yet? =A0As I said, m=
> y crystal ball isn't that good so I'd prefer to err on the side of =
> caution (or at least efficiency).<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> David<br>
> ...<br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> AusNOG mailing list<br>
> <a href=3D"mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net">AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net</a><br>
> <a href=3D"http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog" target=3D"_blan=
> k">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a><br>
> </div></div><div><div></div><div class=3D"h5">*****************************=
> *******************************************************************<br>
> DISCLAIMER<br>
> <br>
> Confidential Communication: This email and any attachments are intended for=
>  the addressee(s)<br>
> only and are confidential. They may contain legally privileged or copyright=
>  material. If you<br>
> are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately by re=
> ply email and<br>
> delete this email and any attachments. You must not read, copy, use, distri=
> bute or disclose<br>
> the contents of this email without consent and Harvey Norman Holdings Limit=
> ed ACN 003 237 545<br>
> (and its related subsidiaries) (=93Harvey Norman=94) does not accept respon=
> sibility for any<br>
> unauthorised use or reliance on the contents of this email.<br>
> <br>
> Harvey Norman does not represent or warrant that the integrity of this emai=
> l has been maintained<br>
> or that it is free from errors, viruses, interceptions or interference. Any=
>  views expressed by<br>
> the sender do not necessarily represent the views of Harvey Norman.<br>
> <br>
> This notice should not be removed from this email.<br>
> ***************************************************************************=
> *********************<br>
> </div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
> AusNOG mailing list<br>
> <a href=3D"mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net">AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net</a><br>
> <a href=3D"http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog" target=3D"_blan=
> k">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a><br>
> <br></blockquote></div><br><br clear=3D"all"><br>-- <br><b><a href=3D"http:=
> //mattlog.net" target=3D"_blank">mattlog.net</a></b><br><br>
> 
> --0016361e7a6641ddc504a049f975--
> 
> --===============0655174925==
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Content-Disposition: inline
> 
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
> 
> --===============0655174925==--
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: marka at isc.org