Re: Fixed IP / IP ranges

["mark_harrison_uk2" <mph@xxxxxxx>]

Shaf,

I sort of agree with both of you.

I agree with you that IPv6 is way better thatn IPv4 in lots of ways,
and there's too much emphasis on increased address space as if that
were the only benefit.

I agree with Gerard in that IPv4 has proved useful over a long
period, and has scaled far more than the anyone would have believed
back in the early days of the internet.

Anyway, this is interesting, but less and less HA-related with each
message, so I'll shut up now :-)

Regards,

Mark

--- In ukha_d@xxxxxxx, "Shaf" <shaf@s...> wrote:
> > I don't think IPv4 is that crap. In theory you can have over 4
billion
> > addresses which will see us fine for a few years yet.
> >
> > Considering this was conceived many years ago I don't think that
is too
> bad.
>
> Shesh how many times do I have to say : The IP range of IPv6 vs v4
is not
> the deciding factor. If that was the only benefit of ipv6 I'd have
to agree
> that v4 will do for now. Consider the benefits of dynamic routing,
security
> (well kinda) and ease of set up to name a few the only hard bit is
to
> understand what .....
>
> eth0      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:20:xx:10:1a:xx
>           inet addr:xxx.xxx.xx.x  Bcast:xx.xxx.xx.x
Mask:255.255.255.248
>           inet6 addr: 2001:600:101b:500:220:edff:fe17:1891/64
Scope:Global
>
> Means.
>
> Shaf