[ppml] Big numbers

[Brian Bergin]

With NAT technology getting better and better do you really think every TV 
and toaster needs a public IP address?  Every individual and company 
already has access to millions of private IPs under IPv4.  Encouraging the 
use of public IPs on devices/computers with absolutely NO need to be on the 
public Internet is only going to allow hackers to ruin your holiday dinner 
when they hack your oven and change the temp to 600°F and you get burnt 
turkey or they turn off your furnace or turn off your water heater when 
it's -20°F outside.  Any way you look at it, putting an IP on "every 
electrical and electronic component as well as subsystems elements" is a 
bad idea, IMHO....

Maybe I'm just missing the big picture.  Conservation, IMHO, just isn't 
that crucial for IPv6.  I remember when IPv4 was going to be gone 
"tomorrow" or "next year" only a couple years ago.  I believe NAT has had a 
big part in the life extension of IPv4.

Just my 3¢ (inflation you know...)

Brian Bergin
ComCept Solutions, LLC



At 18:28 07 04 03 Monday, Bill Darte wrote:
>Of course, we are not talking about numbering individuals, but potentially
>every electrical and electronic component as well as subsystem elements
>perhaps....  there is no census data for these things, but undoubtedly this
>represents a very large number as well.
>
>Bill Darte
>ARIN AC
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: David Conrad
>To: ppml at arin.net
>Sent: 4/7/03 2:56 PM
>Subject: [ppml] Big numbers
>
>Apropos a comment I made during the Q&A during the IPv6 working group
>discussion...
>
>According to the latest IPv6 architecture drafts:
>- 35,184,372,088,832 /48s currently available for assignment
>- a bit under 246,290,604,621,824 /48s available under the other format
>specifiers
>
>Just for fun, according to the US Census bureau:
>- Estimated world population as of 4/7/03, 15:29 GMT+5: 6,285,260,947
>- Estimated world population in 2050: ~9,000,000,000
>
>Taking the 35,184,372,088,832 /48s currently available for assignments,
>this means:
>- 5600 /48s per person today
>- 3909 /48s per person in 2050
>
>And then there are the other format specifiers...
>
>Note that those are /48s (each capable of addressing 64K /64s or, if
>you want ignore the auto-configuration goop that eats the lower 64,
>1,208,925,819,614,629,174,706,176 /128s).
>
>As such, I don't believe address conservation is or will be an issue.
>At least for the lifetime of IPv6.  Keeping the routing system
>constrained undoubtedly is, although I'm not convinced this is the RIRs
>job (after all, RIRs explicitly do not guarantee routability)...
>
>(Hope I got my math right... :-))
>
>Rgds,
>-drc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20030407/7c95ae40/attachment.htm>