<html>
<body>
<font size=3>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....<br><br>
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.<br><br>
Just my 3¢ (inflation you know...)<br><br>
Brian Bergin<br>
ComCept Solutions, LLC<br><br>
<br><br>
At 18:28 07 04 03 Monday, Bill Darte wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>Of course, we are not talking about
numbering individuals, but potentially<br>
every electrical and electronic component as well as subsystem
elements<br>
perhaps.... there is no census data for these things, but
undoubtedly this<br>
represents a very large number as well.<br><br>
Bill Darte<br>
ARIN AC<br><br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: David Conrad<br>
To: ppml@arin.net<br>
Sent: 4/7/03 2:56 PM<br>
Subject: [ppml] Big numbers<br><br>
Apropos a comment I made during the Q&A during the IPv6 working group
<br>
discussion...<br><br>
According to the latest IPv6 architecture drafts:<br>
- 35,184,372,088,832 /48s currently available for assignment<br>
- a bit under 246,290,604,621,824 /48s available under the other format
<br>
specifiers<br><br>
Just for fun, according to the US Census bureau:<br>
- Estimated world population as of 4/7/03, 15:29 GMT+5:
6,285,260,947<br>
- Estimated world population in 2050: ~9,000,000,000<br><br>
Taking the 35,184,372,088,832 /48s currently available for assignments,
<br>
this means:<br>
- 5600 /48s per person today<br>
- 3909 /48s per person in 2050<br><br>
And then there are the other format specifiers...<br><br>
Note that those are /48s (each capable of addressing 64K /64s or, if
<br>
you want ignore the auto-configuration goop that eats the lower 64,
<br>
1,208,925,819,614,629,174,706,176 /128s).<br><br>
As such, I don't believe address conservation is or will be an
issue. <br>
At least for the lifetime of IPv6. Keeping the routing system
<br>
constrained undoubtedly is, although I'm not convinced this is the RIRs
<br>
job (after all, RIRs explicitly do not guarantee
routability)...<br><br>
(Hope I got my math right... :-))<br><br>
Rgds,<br>
-drc </font></blockquote></body>
</html>