From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.ausics.net (mail.ausics.net [IPv6:2403:580a:1f3d::9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9DD863B2A4 for ; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 00:04:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.ausics.net (valhalla.ausics.net [10.10.0.10]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.ausics.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6C862200095; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 14:04:38 +1000 (AEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=ausics.net; s=dkim1; t=1695614678; bh=ZOPCIUlNrj62if1kNrr29vXEzCtRKogbNT+JYZdE9Wo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=U/6tl+z/uP5mKrYgEUX8bzm0veHRdOAMbWP4SxYAnADU4vbT3bOl/P5OxrHdrGGQZ 6QJ7uAT0n3zmwZywbdG+6QeIY+WngtxIRRIwwx1veNOmWQoNQk9YrC1dyPp1LAqGU3 Vzu3WEUaXnqKwRlOrYIgORptlPF3zOnNhLzsKxblvsYdEGoSjqAYi35REXvnkMA4RE 4lOJCJuCriD9Khx1kf7xp2oUcUTPyoNuDBgY/treSa8KdUszNz3BXY+diVuKrKZWbt 5cY0Yp5Ru4vy9eGdPDX2a3qwa4tp7/UKFJ+swuw+jgoPbHnAWhWLrXOs5O0QmkF9Wb 5yDjul6GXYqeQ== Received: from O6XGAyYPdvMeRfJa19T4VbBrfA4B21OWm1TYiiJyXw8= (mZJMVqTF/FYm+Do8cUfHWq239frmsa7t) by mail.ausics.net with HTTP (HTTP/1.1 POST); Mon, 25 Sep 2023 14:04:38 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2023 14:04:38 +1000 From: Noel Butler To: Michael Richardson Cc: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net In-Reply-To: <15589.1695580211@localhost> References: <9d96e8d6-8a40-4353-b7a3-49881742f1a7@auckland.ac.nz> <15589.1695580211@localhost> User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail Message-ID: X-Sender: noel.butler@ausics.net Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_a07f647e7e92f9ff424fe5bd1e780da9" Subject: Re: [Starlink] APNIC56 last week X-BeenThere: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "Starlink has bufferbloat. Bad." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2023 04:04:41 -0000 --=_a07f647e7e92f9ff424fe5bd1e780da9 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed On 25/09/2023 04:30, Michael Richardson wrote: >> FUD they came out with in mid 90's about IPv4's imminent demise giving > > I think you malign Geoff to no purpose. > > Geoff Houston is brilliant in putting up well thought out strawmans > (strawmen? Strawpeople?), often with the goal of cristalizing what > exactly we don't like about them. So, we only use the facts that suite our arguments? Only way to make informed decisions is to consider all aspects, even the ones we cover our eyes with, you know, can't see it so it isn't happening type ones :) >> It's also like the local water board here who last week came out >> saying a >> whopping 70% of people surveyed said they'd drink recycled water, of >> course >> it was the local water board that conducted this alleged survey, >> because >90% >> of the more independent polling shows a totally different story. > > I've never seen such independent polling. I've seen water bottle > company polls :-) The water board in Queensland Australia did just that, countered by media polling, now, and over the past 10 years. > If you think IPv4 is fine, then Geoff's architecture, with 0.0.0.0/1 > being for > eyeballs NAT44, 128.0.0.0/3 for institutions and SDN and class C being > swamp/infrastructure should work just fine. The question is how to get > there. Please quote my post where I said ipv4 is fine, I don't seem to have it in sent mail, and if it was all okie dokie, I wouldn't have been running ipv6 myself for past 10½ years ;) -- Regards, Noel Butler This Email, including attachments, may contain legally privileged information, therefore at all times remains confidential and subject to copyright protected under international law. You may not disseminate this message without the authors express written authority to do so. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender then delete all copies of this message including attachments immediately. Confidentiality, copyright, and legal privilege are not waived or lost by reason of the mistaken delivery of this message. --=_a07f647e7e92f9ff424fe5bd1e780da9 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8

On 25/09/2023 04:30, Michael Richardson wrote:

=
    > FUD they came out with in mid 90's about= IPv4's imminent demise giving

I think you malign Geoff to no pu= rpose.

Geoff Houston is brilliant in putting up well thought out= strawmans
(strawmen? Strawpeople?), often with the goal of cristalizi= ng what exactly we don't like about them.
=  
= So, we only use the facts that suite our arguments?
=  
= Only way to make informed decisions is to consider all aspects, even the on= es we cover our eyes with, you know, can't see it so it isn't happening typ= e ones :)
=  
=  
=
    > It's also like the local water board her= e who last week came out saying a
    > whoppin= g 70% of people surveyed said they'd drink recycled water, of course
&= nbsp;   > it was the local water board that conducted thi= s alleged survey, because >90%
    > of the = more independent polling shows a totally different story.

I've n= ever seen such independent polling.  I've seen water bottle company po= lls :-)
=  
= The water board in Queensland Australia did just that, countered by media p= olling, now, and over the past 10 years.
=  
= If you think IPv4 is fine, then Geoff's architecture, with 0.0.0.0/1 being = for
eyeballs NAT44, 128.0.0.0/3 for institutions and SDN and class C b= eing
swamp/infrastructure should work just fine.  The question is= how to get
there.

Please quote my post where I said ipv4 is fine, I don't seem to have it = in sent mail, and if it was all okie dokie, I wouldn't have been running ip= v6 myself for past 10½ years ;)


--

Regards,
Noel Butler

This Email, including attachments, may contain legally pri= vileged information, therefore at all times remains confidential and subjec= t to copyright protected under international law. You may not disseminate t= his message without the authors express written authority to do so.   = If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender then delete= all copies of this message including attachments immediately. Confidential= ity, copyright, and legal privilege are not waived or lost by reason of the= mistaken delivery of this message.


--=_a07f647e7e92f9ff424fe5bd1e780da9--