[LINK] www.ipv6.org.au/summit

[Karl Auer]

On Sat, 2008-08-30 at 19:26 +0000, stephen at melbpc.org.au wrote:
> Karl writes,
> > You're missing the point. The original message proposed the rather sad,
> > small-visioned and faintly absurd idea of stealing some of the port bits
> > in the IP packet to extend the address size.
> The research ideas you call 'sad & absurd' seem to be flying well, Karl :-)

Oh, it'll *work*. That doesn't make it any the less sad or
small-visioned.

Including bits from the port number is not that dissimilar from the
current network/host addressing, where the boundary between network and
host is moveable within the total number of bits in the address.

My issue with it has nothing to do with whether it will *work*, it has
to do with the fact that it is so small. What happens when these few
extra addresses run out too? And the proposal absolutely forbids massive
address spaces or large numbers of ports. We get just enough addresses,
for now, but in exchange for more limitations. And almost certainly more
NAT.

So I guess I hope that the world - which is us, too by the way - decides
to bite the bullet and go dual stack IPv6. It's a far, far less painful
road to travel than any other thus far proposed.

I'm also afraid of a Balkanisation of the Internet, with lots of
alternative and mutually incompatible solutions in place, all championed
by this or that major corporate. If business can find a way to bring
back the wonderful, profitable walled gardens of the eighties (Prodigy,
Compuserv etc), they will, to the detriment of all.

Regards, K.

-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Karl Auer (kauer at biplane.com.au)                   +61-2-64957160 (h)
http://www.biplane.com.au/~kauer/                  +61-428-957160 (mob)

GPG fingerprint: DD23 0DF3 2260 3060 7FEC 5CA8 1AF6 D9E3 CFEE 6B28
Public key at  : random.sks.keyserver.penguin.de