Cable modem users could get static IPs soon.

[ted leslie]

Where are these minimum guesses coming from?
Big diff from a ISP getting that min. and a single cust. getting that as a min.
I know they have officially run out of ipv4, but I still haven't heard any
specific announcements on a adoption date of 6.

tl

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Lennart Sorensen
<lsorense-1wCw9BSqJbv44Nm34jS7GywD8/FfD2ys at public.gmane.org> wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:10:41AM -0400, James Knott wrote:
>> Lennart Sorensen wrote:
>> >http://www.itworldcanada.com/news/cablecos-lose-decision-before-crtc/143158
>> >
>> >This would be nice.  If this works out we would be able to have static
>> >IPs on cable modem service from teksavvy and such.  That would be nice.
>> >
>>
>> What would be nicer would be the ISPs getting in gear with IPv6.
>> Instead of a stingy (soon to run out) single IPv4 address, you'd get
>> a huge subnet (minimum 2^64 addresses, mine's 2^72).  Even if an ISP
>> handed out single addresses, there'd still be no shortage, as their
>> subnet would also be a minimum of 2^64 or 18446744073709551616
>> addresses.  So they could give you as many as you wanted.
>
> Would be nice, especially since an ISP can not give end users less than
> 2^64 addresses.
>
> --
> Len Sorensen
> --
> The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
> TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
> How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists
>
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists