Subject: Re: Re[6]: national security

From: Kurt Erik Lindqvist <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 18:15:52 +0100

On fredag, nov 28, 2003, at 20:10 Europe/Stockholm, Anthony G. 
Atkielski wrote:

>
>> Ah, I see what you mean now. However, the devision is a done deal as
>> RFC 3513 mandates that all unicast IPv6 addresses except the ones
>> starting with the bits 000 must have a 64-bit interface identifier in
>> the lower 64 bits. This has some important advantages, most notably it
>> allows stateless autoconfiguration. (However, this could have been 
>> done
>> with 48 bits too.) But it does have the downside you mention by only
>> leaving 64 bits for numbering subnets. The practice of giving all 
>> sites
>> a /48 further deminishes the available bits.
>
> Wow ... it's even worse than I thought!  Why bother even going to IPv6?
>

so you are making claims and comments on something you don't even have 
bothered to read the basic documentation on. Wow.

- - kurtis -

---

From: "Anthony G. Atkielski" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 23:33:13 +0100

> bothered to read the basic documentation on. Wow.

Wait twenty years, and we'll see who's surprised.