nanog mailing list archives

Re: 240/4


From: Joe Greco <jgreco () ns sol net>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 16:22:13 -0500 (CDT)


Joe,
On Oct 18, 2007, at 8:49 AM, Joe Greco wrote:
The ROI on the move to v6 is immense compared to the ROI on the move
to v4-240+, which will surely only benefit a few.

I am told by people who have inside knowledge that one of the issues  
they are facing in deploying IPv6 is that an IPv6 stack + IPv4 stack  
have a larger memory footprint that IPv4 alone in devices that have  
essentially zero memory for code left (in fact, they're designed that  
way).  Fixing devices so that they can accept 240/4 is a software fix  
that can be done with a binary patch and no additional memory.  And  
there are a _lot_ of these devices.

Sure, I agree there are.  How does that number compare to the number of
devices which can't or won't be upgraded to IPv4-240+?

... JG
-- 
Joe Greco - sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee, WI - http://www.sol.net
"We call it the 'one bite at the apple' rule. Give me one chance [and] then I
won't contact you again." - Direct Marketing Ass'n position on e-mail spam(CNN)
With 24 million small businesses in the US alone, that's way too many apples.


Current thread: