Return-Path: Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([unix socket]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Cyrus v2.1.11-Mandrake-RPM-2.1.11-1mdk) with LMTP; Fri, 11 Mar 2005 23:50:50 +0100 X-Sieve: CMU Sieve 2.2 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED294621E8 for ; Fri, 11 Mar 2005 23:50:49 +0100 (CET) Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 14633-01 for ; Fri, 11 Mar 2005 23:50:48 +0100 (CET) Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01A2261C31 for ; Fri, 11 Mar 2005 23:50:47 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1D9svv-00082m-1f; Fri, 11 Mar 2005 17:48:39 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1D9svr-0007zE-On for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 11 Mar 2005 17:48:35 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA14594 for ; Fri, 11 Mar 2005 17:48:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from [63.247.76.195] (helo=montage.altserver.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1D9syv-0006rE-Kx for ietf@ietf.org; Fri, 11 Mar 2005 17:51:45 -0500 Received: from if12m4-235.d2.club-internet.fr ([212.195.66.235] helo=jfc.afrac.org) by montage.altserver.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.44) id 1D9svk-0004ur-K3; Fri, 11 Mar 2005 14:48:29 -0800 Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20050311223050.032d4840@mail.jefsey.com> X-Sender: jefsey+jefsey.com@mail.jefsey.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 22:41:57 +0100 To: Kevin Loch From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" In-Reply-To: <4232091E.7060806@hotnic.net> References: <20050311141827.E443586ADD@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <4232091E.7060806@hotnic.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - montage.altserver.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - jefsey.com X-Scan-Signature: 79899194edc4f33a41f49410777972f8 Cc: nanog@merit.edu, ietf@ietf.org Subject: Re: FW: Why? X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF-Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at alvestrand.no At 22:09 11/03/2005, Kevin Loch wrote: >If you really want to jump start n^2, find a way to convince the RIR's to >require demonstration of IPv6 deployment for subsequent (non initial) IPv4 >allocations. I fear that we overlook a point you make here: "RIRs require demonstration". I suppose that if you had to desmonstrate you need a mobile or a phone number, the expansion of the telephone network and then of mobiles would have been slower. Has someone compared the IPv6, IPv4, telephone and mobile number/address allocation figures? It takes me 10 minutes in a supermarket to get an operational mobile. The only thing it misses nowaday is an IP address. May be you will recall that in 2000 the telephone industry had asked for 2 IP blocks and ICANN responded (in July/Aug?) they could use the "virtual NAT" which is HTTP.1.1. jfc _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf