On 29/11/06, Philip D'Ath
Let's take a specific example. Comcast have 100 million customers on their own, in their one single network. This is a single operator.
This struck me as 'yeah right'.
From comcast website: (http://www.comcast.com/Corporate/About/CorporateInfo/CorporateInfo.html)
Overview: Comcast Corporation is the nation's leading provider of cable, entertainment and communications products and services, with 24.1 million cable customers, 11 million high-speed Internet customers and 2.1 million voice customers. Comcast is principally involved in the development, management and operation of broadband cable networks and in the delivery of programming content.* If you are going to use number at least spend the 10 seconds backing up the figures to refute others. Also these 24 million cable customers are likely on many different networks as Comcast has purchased other smaller operators. So while they may have 24 million cable clients I would think it is more like they have 20-30 cable networks they are trying to managed.
Lets assume that in 10 years time China has 1 billion set top box's.
We can assume anything we want, however that would mean that every 'home' in China would have 2.5 set top boxes. (I have assumed avg home being 3 people and if you dont know the population growth in china is near 0% ). I mean with 10+ years of Sky in NZ we have at max 60% household penetration?
RFC1918 is not big enough. IPv4 is barely big enough. It has to go to IPv6.
Call me stupid but then why not just use IPv6 address space for your 100 million comcast clients and billion set top boxes in china? That being said the discussion has been very interesting and I wonder if any economist has used scarcity modeling on predicting the final 'run up' of IPv4 space. -- Steven Heath +64 21 706-067 I'll click on yours if you'll click on mine.