Re: Re[4]: national security

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 22:17:41 GMT, Tim Chown <tjc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>  said:
> The "at current burn rate" assumption is far from safe though...

Oh? Have any better-than-handwaving reasons to suspect the current allocation
rate will change drastically?  I don't forsee the cellphone or embedded
markets taking much IPv4 address space - both of those areas are already
pointing to IPv6.  Much of the world isn't online yet, but quite frankly,
those areas have severe infrastructure and economic problems to resolve
before they start chewing up a lot of address space (yes, China and India
have enough warm bodies to burn out the address space - they don't have the
monetary units to do so).

I'm more than happy to accept any realistic projections that point to
a change in the burn rate - if you know of something I've overlooked,
please enlighten us....

Attachment: pgp00358.pgp
Description: PGP signature


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]