Re: IPv6 vs. Stupid NAT tricks: false dichotomy? (Was: Re: StupidNAT tricks and how to stop them.)

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

 



On Wed, 29 Mar 2006, Mark Andrews wrote:


The other side of the coin is the fact that many devices will effectively
require no more than a /128 because of the way they connect up to the
network. For example cell phones will be serviced on plans where the
subscription fee is per device. Verizon, T-mobile, cingular need no more
than one /64 each to service those networks.

	Well I see cell phones as routers for the on body IPv6 bluetooth
	network.

I find it interesting that our vision is frequently so short-sighted that we can't even envision in the course of an arguement the applications that are possible today let alone the ones that people will want in the future.

	I see cell phones as routers for your laptop.

they are now really...

	Mark
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews@xxxxxxx

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joel Jaeggli  	       Unix Consulting 	       joelja@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
GPG Key Fingerprint:     5C6E 0104 BAF0 40B0 5BD3 C38B F000 35AB B67F 56B2


_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

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