Considering computers double in power every 18 months, most people stopped caring about IPv6's extra overhead in 1994.
(At some level, 128 > 32, so unless all the algorithms used for routing are constant-time over the addresses, IPv6 will always cost more. But if you add up a bunch of layers of NAT, that's not free either. So this argument boils down to "if nobody used the Internet, it would require less hardware to run". Well, yeah.)
while what you are saying is true, the upper bounds of all things limit the costs required to deploy infinite amounts of memory and processor cycles at scale.
As always, a happy medium is required. That being said, once you boot up another stack, allocate various caches, and have your engineers maintain an additional set of configuration, the costs come down. But for ~10k routes, the costs to route those ips is greater than routing v4.
Comments
Yes, this is a perfectly good class C network wasted. What a shame.
It's a shame that people are still (incorrectly) using the term "class C" 15+ years since classless addressing has been address too. =)
It's a shame people still value and use IPv4 addresses when IPv6 has been around for 15+ years....
It's a shame people don't understand that IPv6 addresses are ~twice as costly to route.
Not all things that are better are free.
Are you joking?
Citation?
Considering computers double in power every 18 months, most people stopped caring about IPv6's extra overhead in 1994.
(At some level, 128 > 32, so unless all the algorithms used for routing are constant-time over the addresses, IPv6 will always cost more. But if you add up a bunch of layers of NAT, that's not free either. So this argument boils down to "if nobody used the Internet, it would require less hardware to run". Well, yeah.)
while what you are saying is true, the upper bounds of all things limit the costs required to deploy infinite amounts of memory and processor cycles at scale.
As always, a happy medium is required. That being said, once you boot up another stack, allocate various caches, and have your engineers maintain an additional set of configuration, the costs come down. But for ~10k routes, the costs to route those ips is greater than routing v4.
touché :)