[ppml] IPv6>>32

>
> I think that argument is a little misleading.  Extrapolating
> (32 bits / 30 years) = (64 bits / 60 years) assumes that past
> performance is a predictor of future allocation [1].
>
It's also mathematically incorrect.  (32 bits/30 years) generally
should approximate (33 bits/60 years).  Even allowing for growth
rate, I don't see us using 2^32 times as much space in twice the
time (which is the ratio between 32 bits and 64 bits). (this
expands on Lee's [1] below).


> The magic of a /64 is that it's a single routable entity.  If I
> assume that layer 3 networks connect layer 2 networks, I still
> haven't seen any argument here about what a layer 2 network of
> 2^64 devices would look like.  It's not only inconceivable, it's
> inconceivable to (2^32) power or more, and then we say that we
> have to assign this enormous set of numbers in groups of 2^16.
>
Agreed.


> [1] OK, technically it assumes an exponential progression, but a
> predictable exponent.  And I don't think most people see that.
>
Yeah... That one.  :-)

Owen

-- 
If this message was not signed with gpg key 0FE2AA3D, it's probably
a forgery.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/ppml/attachments/20050510/3d2c995e/attachment.bin