RE: Reality (was RE: Stupid NAT tricks and how to stop them.)

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

 



If Boeing had rolled out IPv6 in 1993-1994 when Eric wrote RFC1687 it
> would not have done anything to their bottom line as of today and wasted
> my money.

If Boeing had rolled out IPv6 in 1993-1994 by now they would have an efficient
production and real time inventory management; would have saved billions in costs
and were giving (at least part of it) to Michel.

As a shareholder you may want to think how you vote during the next shareholders
meeting.

Cheers,

peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 

--- Michel Py <michel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Brian,
> 
> >> Michel Py wrote:
> >>                v
> >>                |
> >>                /\
> >> +---------+   /  \   +------------+
> >> | Upgrade |__/ ?  \__| Give money |
> >> | To IPv6 |  \    /  | to Michel  |
> >> +---------+   \  /   +------------+
> >>                \/
> >> 
> >> Mmmmm. Tough call.
> 
> > Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> > Yes, it is. It's called long term strategic investment
> > versus short term profit taking. That's a very tough call.
> 
> If Boeing had rolled out IPv6 in 1993-1994 when Eric wrote RFC1687 it
> would not have done anything to their bottom line as of today and wasted
> my money. If they had deployed 5 years ago there still would be no
> return as of today and if they deployed today I see no return (in
> reduced operating costs) for 5 years. As a shareholder my best interest
> so far has been not to deploy. My instructions are: keep an eye on the
> situation, if there is a change in conditions that means IPv6 buck could
> bring bang _then_ go for it; in the mean time put my cash where it does
> bring some bang, either by developing new products or by paying me
> dividends 4 times a year.
> 
> As long as other shareholders (especially the ones who work there and
> likely have scores of unvested shares) think the same way, this is the
> deal. 
> 
> 
> > Eliot Lear wrote:
> > Boeing has enough devices and networks that it could on its own
> > probably exhaust a substantial portion of remaining IPv4 address
> > space we have now.  They certainly have more than a /8's worth,
> > and that poses RFC1918 problems
> 
> Boeing has 159,000 employees. RFC1918 space is 17,891,328 addresses.
> That's more than 100 IP addresses per employee, I think Eric can manage.
> 
> That being said, I do acknowledge that larger companies such as global
> ISPs do have a problem with the RFC1918 space being too small. This
> brings the debate of what to do with class E, either make it extended
> private space or make it global unicast.
> 
> Michel.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@xxxxxxxx
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

_______________________________________________

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]