mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 End User Fee
From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2012 10:31:02 -0700
On Aug 4, 2012, at 03:01 , Eugen Leitl <eugen () leitl org> wrote:
On Fri, Aug 03, 2012 at 08:31:06PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
You MIGHT have paid some other organization for the privilege of transferring part or all of their registration
rights to you.
But in no case did you pay for the addresses themselves unless you are silly enough to think that a person can own
IPv6 missed a great chance of doing away with all the
central waterfall trickle-down space distribution.
There was no need to fix what wasn't broken.
Luckily, /64 looks like large enough to bypass that
by offering address space sufficiently large while
co-existable with legacy addressing and routing.
Why on earth would you be messing around within /64? It should be easy enough to get a /48 (it certainly is now).
I hope eventually somebody will start
tinkering with mesh radios which also have GPS
onboard (as most smartphones and tablets do).
24 + 24 + 16 bits are just enough to represent
a decent-resolution WGS84 position fix. Plus,
GPS gives you a pretty accurate clock.
That could be an interesting project. Limiting it to a /64 still doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
Re: IPv6 End User Fee Dan Luedtke (Aug 06)
- Re: IPv6 End User Fee, (continued)