Re: Re[4]: national security

To: Tim Chown <tjc at ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Re[4]: national security
From: shogunx <shogunx at sleekfreak.ath.cx>
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 18:40:50 -0500 (EST)
Cc: IETF Discussion <ietf at ietf.org>
In-reply-to: <20031129221741.GB12482@login.ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Sender: owner-ietf at ietf.org

On Sat, 29 Nov 2003, Tim Chown wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 28, 2003 at 03:15:04PM -0500, Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu wrote:
> > On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 20:06:26 +0100, "Anthony G. Atkielski" <anthony at atkielski.com>  said:
> >
> > > 33 bits
> >
> > 8,589,934,592 times as many addresses.  At current burn rates, it will take
> > us some 20 years to go through the *current* free IPv4 space.  And nobody's
> > proposed any killer app that will take millions of times more address
> > space.
>
> The "at current burn rate" assumption is far from safe though...

As is the concept of IP address space as a commodity item.

>
> Tim
>
>

sleekfreak pirate broadcast
world tour 2002-3
live from the pirate hideout
http://sleekfreak.ath.cx:81/

References:
- Re: Re[4]: national security
  - From: Tim Chown

Prev by Date: Re: Re[4]: national security
Next by Date: Re: national security
Previous by thread: Re: Re[4]: national security
Next by thread: Re: Re[4]: national security
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.

Re: Re[4]: national security

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.