<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_08_1339229</id>
	<title>IPv4 Will Not Die In 2010</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1262958480000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>darthcamaro writes <i>"A couple of years ago, the big shots at IANA (that's the people that handle internet addressing) issued a release stating that the IPv4 address space was likely to be gone by 2010. Here we are in 2010 and guess what, IPv4 with its 4.3 billion addresses will NOT be all used up this year. In fact there <a href="http://www.enterprisenetworkingplanet.com/netsp/article.php/3857201">could be another two years worth</a> of addresses still left at this point. 'We're at about 10.2 percent (IPv4 address space) remaining globally,' John Curran, president and CEO of ARIN said. 'At our current trend rate we've got about 625 days before we will not have new IPv4 addresses available. We're still handling IPv4 requests from ISPs, hosting companies and large users for IPv4 address space, but that's a very short time period.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>darthcamaro writes " A couple of years ago , the big shots at IANA ( that 's the people that handle internet addressing ) issued a release stating that the IPv4 address space was likely to be gone by 2010 .
Here we are in 2010 and guess what , IPv4 with its 4.3 billion addresses will NOT be all used up this year .
In fact there could be another two years worth of addresses still left at this point .
'We 're at about 10.2 percent ( IPv4 address space ) remaining globally, ' John Curran , president and CEO of ARIN said .
'At our current trend rate we 've got about 625 days before we will not have new IPv4 addresses available .
We 're still handling IPv4 requests from ISPs , hosting companies and large users for IPv4 address space , but that 's a very short time period .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>darthcamaro writes "A couple of years ago, the big shots at IANA (that's the people that handle internet addressing) issued a release stating that the IPv4 address space was likely to be gone by 2010.
Here we are in 2010 and guess what, IPv4 with its 4.3 billion addresses will NOT be all used up this year.
In fact there could be another two years worth of addresses still left at this point.
'We're at about 10.2 percent (IPv4 address space) remaining globally,' John Curran, president and CEO of ARIN said.
'At our current trend rate we've got about 625 days before we will not have new IPv4 addresses available.
We're still handling IPv4 requests from ISPs, hosting companies and large users for IPv4 address space, but that's a very short time period.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697434</id>
	<title>Re:I genuinely wish they would just give it all aw</title>
	<author>rs79</author>
	<datestamp>1262977680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Look at the criticisms google staffers noted: <a href="http://www.metacafe.com/watch/yt-mZo69JQoLb8/google\_ipv6\_conference\_2008\_what\_will\_the\_ipv6\_internet\_look\_like/" title="metacafe.com">http://www.metacafe.com/watch/yt-mZo69JQoLb8/google\_ipv6\_conference\_2008\_what\_will\_the\_ipv6\_internet\_look\_like/</a> [metacafe.com]</p><p>I don't expect to ever use v6. There's just no need and won't work for a very very very long time if at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Look at the criticisms google staffers noted : http : //www.metacafe.com/watch/yt-mZo69JQoLb8/google \ _ipv6 \ _conference \ _2008 \ _what \ _will \ _the \ _ipv6 \ _internet \ _look \ _like/ [ metacafe.com ] I do n't expect to ever use v6 .
There 's just no need and wo n't work for a very very very long time if at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Look at the criticisms google staffers noted: http://www.metacafe.com/watch/yt-mZo69JQoLb8/google\_ipv6\_conference\_2008\_what\_will\_the\_ipv6\_internet\_look\_like/ [metacafe.com]I don't expect to ever use v6.
There's just no need and won't work for a very very very long time if at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694094</id>
	<title>Re:IPv4 doesn't die</title>
	<author>Ruede</author>
	<datestamp>1262964960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"We're still handling IPv4 requests from ISPs, hosting companies and large users for IPv4 address space, but that's a very short time period.'"</p><p>duh oh rly? quite obvious...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" We 're still handling IPv4 requests from ISPs , hosting companies and large users for IPv4 address space , but that 's a very short time period .
' " duh oh rly ?
quite obvious.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"We're still handling IPv4 requests from ISPs, hosting companies and large users for IPv4 address space, but that's a very short time period.
'"duh oh rly?
quite obvious...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693602</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30695224</id>
	<title>Yay IPv6!</title>
	<author>javalizard</author>
	<datestamp>1262969280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We can finally assign an IP address to every atom on the Earth.  That should take care of things.  At the rate the Earth is collecting space dust though we would run out of IPv6 addresses on May 4th 2022.  Time for IPv8.   We can base it on veggie juice.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We can finally assign an IP address to every atom on the Earth .
That should take care of things .
At the rate the Earth is collecting space dust though we would run out of IPv6 addresses on May 4th 2022 .
Time for IPv8 .
We can base it on veggie juice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We can finally assign an IP address to every atom on the Earth.
That should take care of things.
At the rate the Earth is collecting space dust though we would run out of IPv6 addresses on May 4th 2022.
Time for IPv8.
We can base it on veggie juice.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697700</id>
	<title>Re:In other news....</title>
	<author>KonoWatakushi</author>
	<datestamp>1262978700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>3.  With a few exceptions, modern, supported OSes (Windows [2003, 2008, Vista, 7], GNU/Linux, all of the BSDs, OS X) support IPv6 perfectly.</p></div><p>Sadly, OSX does not.  There is no support for NFS or SMB over IPv6.  More importantly though, DNS is completely broken for hosts which have both v4 and v6 addresses, so you won't get far if you turn off v4.</p><p>Another critically missing piece is home routers. Also,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. regrettably, but you could use <a href="http://slashdot.org.sixxs.org/" title="sixxs.org">http://slashdot.org.sixxs.org/</a> [sixxs.org] in the mean time.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>3 .
With a few exceptions , modern , supported OSes ( Windows [ 2003 , 2008 , Vista , 7 ] , GNU/Linux , all of the BSDs , OS X ) support IPv6 perfectly.Sadly , OSX does not .
There is no support for NFS or SMB over IPv6 .
More importantly though , DNS is completely broken for hosts which have both v4 and v6 addresses , so you wo n't get far if you turn off v4.Another critically missing piece is home routers .
Also , / .
regrettably , but you could use http : //slashdot.org.sixxs.org/ [ sixxs.org ] in the mean time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>3.
With a few exceptions, modern, supported OSes (Windows [2003, 2008, Vista, 7], GNU/Linux, all of the BSDs, OS X) support IPv6 perfectly.Sadly, OSX does not.
There is no support for NFS or SMB over IPv6.
More importantly though, DNS is completely broken for hosts which have both v4 and v6 addresses, so you won't get far if you turn off v4.Another critically missing piece is home routers.
Also, /.
regrettably, but you could use http://slashdot.org.sixxs.org/ [sixxs.org] in the mean time.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694186</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697064</id>
	<title>Re:In other news....</title>
	<author>Bert64</author>
	<datestamp>1262976240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The federal agencies were required to use equipment that "supports" ipv6...<br>What this means, is that they bought kit which had ipv6 as a bullet point on the feature checklist, they have never enabled it, probably don't know how to enable it, certainly haven't tested it so for all we know the support in those devices may be extremely buggy to the point of being useless...<br>And that's just for the backbone, other devices may have no support whatsoever...</p><p>I played with a commercial vpn client that claimed to support ipv6 a while ago, the v6 support was extremely rudimentary and trivially easy to crash... Many combinations of packets with the ip type set to 6 and otherwise invalid data would crash it, like it had no sanity checking whatsoever.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The federal agencies were required to use equipment that " supports " ipv6...What this means , is that they bought kit which had ipv6 as a bullet point on the feature checklist , they have never enabled it , probably do n't know how to enable it , certainly have n't tested it so for all we know the support in those devices may be extremely buggy to the point of being useless...And that 's just for the backbone , other devices may have no support whatsoever...I played with a commercial vpn client that claimed to support ipv6 a while ago , the v6 support was extremely rudimentary and trivially easy to crash... Many combinations of packets with the ip type set to 6 and otherwise invalid data would crash it , like it had no sanity checking whatsoever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The federal agencies were required to use equipment that "supports" ipv6...What this means, is that they bought kit which had ipv6 as a bullet point on the feature checklist, they have never enabled it, probably don't know how to enable it, certainly haven't tested it so for all we know the support in those devices may be extremely buggy to the point of being useless...And that's just for the backbone, other devices may have no support whatsoever...I played with a commercial vpn client that claimed to support ipv6 a while ago, the v6 support was extremely rudimentary and trivially easy to crash... Many combinations of packets with the ip type set to 6 and otherwise invalid data would crash it, like it had no sanity checking whatsoever.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694186</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693608</id>
	<title>IPv4 not dying...</title>
	<author>gandhi\_2</author>
	<datestamp>1262962260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IPv4 not dying... Enterprise Networking Planet confirms it!</p><p>That just doesn't have the same ring to it. ):</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IPv4 not dying... Enterprise Networking Planet confirms it ! That just does n't have the same ring to it .
) :</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IPv4 not dying... Enterprise Networking Planet confirms it!That just doesn't have the same ring to it.
):</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694016</id>
	<title>The adaptation of IPv6 will free IPv4 addresses</title>
	<author>SlOrbA</author>
	<datestamp>1262964540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I predict that 2012 we will still have available IPv4 addresses.</p><p>This will happen because some IPv4 addresses will be reallocated as client-side doesn't need IPv4 addresses in IPv6 to access IPv4 resources. So IPv6 adaptation it self will slow the need to migrate to IPv6 as singular Internet Protocol.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I predict that 2012 we will still have available IPv4 addresses.This will happen because some IPv4 addresses will be reallocated as client-side does n't need IPv4 addresses in IPv6 to access IPv4 resources .
So IPv6 adaptation it self will slow the need to migrate to IPv6 as singular Internet Protocol .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I predict that 2012 we will still have available IPv4 addresses.This will happen because some IPv4 addresses will be reallocated as client-side doesn't need IPv4 addresses in IPv6 to access IPv4 resources.
So IPv6 adaptation it self will slow the need to migrate to IPv6 as singular Internet Protocol.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30695592</id>
	<title>Reclaim unused address space</title>
	<author>rlh100</author>
	<datestamp>1262970540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A simple solution to reclaim unused blocks of addresses would be to allow/encourage people/ companies  to sell their class B or class C net blocks if they are not using them.  I have a class C net block that I do not use.  I got it years ago when all you had to do was fill in the form.  At the time I got several companies class B net blocks.  I suspect that there are many net blocks that were allocated in the late 80;s, early 90's that are not used or are used in a very limited way.</p><p>If we allowed people to sell their net blocks like people can sell their domain names on ebay I suspect that many of these unused blocks of addresses would be put back into the pool of available addresses.</p><p>RLH</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A simple solution to reclaim unused blocks of addresses would be to allow/encourage people/ companies to sell their class B or class C net blocks if they are not using them .
I have a class C net block that I do not use .
I got it years ago when all you had to do was fill in the form .
At the time I got several companies class B net blocks .
I suspect that there are many net blocks that were allocated in the late 80 ; s , early 90 's that are not used or are used in a very limited way.If we allowed people to sell their net blocks like people can sell their domain names on ebay I suspect that many of these unused blocks of addresses would be put back into the pool of available addresses.RLH</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A simple solution to reclaim unused blocks of addresses would be to allow/encourage people/ companies  to sell their class B or class C net blocks if they are not using them.
I have a class C net block that I do not use.
I got it years ago when all you had to do was fill in the form.
At the time I got several companies class B net blocks.
I suspect that there are many net blocks that were allocated in the late 80;s, early 90's that are not used or are used in a very limited way.If we allowed people to sell their net blocks like people can sell their domain names on ebay I suspect that many of these unused blocks of addresses would be put back into the pool of available addresses.RLH</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694754</id>
	<title>Re:Trends</title>
	<author>bkeahl</author>
	<datestamp>1262967600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's great! It does fit too.  I'm wondering if market forces won't buy us a lot more time. As your link points out, demand is not fixed or necessarily going to increase.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's great !
It does fit too .
I 'm wondering if market forces wo n't buy us a lot more time .
As your link points out , demand is not fixed or necessarily going to increase .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's great!
It does fit too.
I'm wondering if market forces won't buy us a lot more time.
As your link points out, demand is not fixed or necessarily going to increase.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693746</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696122</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1262972340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not just holding, but hoarding.</p><p>That's what people tend to do with scarce resources.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not just holding , but hoarding.That 's what people tend to do with scarce resources .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not just holding, but hoarding.That's what people tend to do with scarce resources.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693648</id>
	<title>Panic Averted - Resume Doing Nothing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262962440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another two years? Good, now we can all can put off panicking for another two years and not do anything to resolve this in the meantime.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another two years ?
Good , now we can all can put off panicking for another two years and not do anything to resolve this in the meantime .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another two years?
Good, now we can all can put off panicking for another two years and not do anything to resolve this in the meantime.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694608</id>
	<title>Re:Whats the point? A three year old estimate is o</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262967120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I predict that in eight years the president of the USA will not be Barack Obama. (no caveats, no small print)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I predict that in eight years the president of the USA will not be Barack Obama .
( no caveats , no small print )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I predict that in eight years the president of the USA will not be Barack Obama.
(no caveats, no small print)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693866</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693832</id>
	<title>Re:What about the domain parking, tasting, sniping</title>
	<author>Rary</author>
	<datestamp>1262963400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Parking a domain doesn't necessarily use up an IP address. A parked domain generally directs the user to an ad page, where multiple domains can all be directed to the same ad page. So, really, domain parking conserves IP addresses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Parking a domain does n't necessarily use up an IP address .
A parked domain generally directs the user to an ad page , where multiple domains can all be directed to the same ad page .
So , really , domain parking conserves IP addresses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Parking a domain doesn't necessarily use up an IP address.
A parked domain generally directs the user to an ad page, where multiple domains can all be directed to the same ad page.
So, really, domain parking conserves IP addresses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693878</id>
	<title>We're on slashdot, right?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262963640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> IANA (that's the people that handle internet addressing)</p></div></blockquote><p>Really? Wow, I would never have known. Thanks, Mr. Rogers.  Can you say "IANA"?  Try it.  "I--A--N--A---".  Very good, I knew you could.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>IANA ( that 's the people that handle internet addressing ) Really ?
Wow , I would never have known .
Thanks , Mr. Rogers. Can you say " IANA " ?
Try it .
" I--A--N--A--- " . Very good , I knew you could .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> IANA (that's the people that handle internet addressing)Really?
Wow, I would never have known.
Thanks, Mr. Rogers.  Can you say "IANA"?
Try it.
"I--A--N--A---".  Very good, I knew you could.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693746</id>
	<title>Trends</title>
	<author>mrpacmanjel</author>
	<datestamp>1262963040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"...At our current trend rate we've got about 625 days before we will not have new IPv4 addresses available..."</p><p>I think this:<a href="http://www.xkcd.com/605/" title="xkcd.com">http://www.xkcd.com/605/</a> [xkcd.com] sums it up</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ...At our current trend rate we 've got about 625 days before we will not have new IPv4 addresses available... " I think this : http : //www.xkcd.com/605/ [ xkcd.com ] sums it up</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"...At our current trend rate we've got about 625 days before we will not have new IPv4 addresses available..."I think this:http://www.xkcd.com/605/ [xkcd.com] sums it up</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693890</id>
	<title>World endsz in 2012 anyway</title>
	<author>nedlohs</author>
	<datestamp>1262963700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So it's all good.</p><p>Seriously random calendar rolling over, IPv4 addresses running out. At the same time! Proof that Jesus is coming back in 2012!?!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So it 's all good.Seriously random calendar rolling over , IPv4 addresses running out .
At the same time !
Proof that Jesus is coming back in 2012 ! ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So it's all good.Seriously random calendar rolling over, IPv4 addresses running out.
At the same time!
Proof that Jesus is coming back in 2012!?
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30698974</id>
	<title>Why do we need IPv6?</title>
	<author>pclminion</author>
	<datestamp>1262984100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Can somebody with knowledge please explain why we need to ditch IPv4 instead of just layering on top of it? Most private networks have a tree topology, which implies a single entry/exit point for traffic bound for the rest of the Internet. There's absolutely no need for any entity to have more than a single IP. The internal hosts can be publicized via some new mapping/routing protocol which sits on top of IPv4.

In other words, push IPv4 one click down the network stack and build a larger address space on top of it. Why can't we do this?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Can somebody with knowledge please explain why we need to ditch IPv4 instead of just layering on top of it ?
Most private networks have a tree topology , which implies a single entry/exit point for traffic bound for the rest of the Internet .
There 's absolutely no need for any entity to have more than a single IP .
The internal hosts can be publicized via some new mapping/routing protocol which sits on top of IPv4 .
In other words , push IPv4 one click down the network stack and build a larger address space on top of it .
Why ca n't we do this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can somebody with knowledge please explain why we need to ditch IPv4 instead of just layering on top of it?
Most private networks have a tree topology, which implies a single entry/exit point for traffic bound for the rest of the Internet.
There's absolutely no need for any entity to have more than a single IP.
The internal hosts can be publicized via some new mapping/routing protocol which sits on top of IPv4.
In other words, push IPv4 one click down the network stack and build a larger address space on top of it.
Why can't we do this?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694434</id>
	<title>The Mayas were right!!</title>
	<author>chelip</author>
	<datestamp>1262966280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>One more thing to worry about in 2012!</htmltext>
<tokenext>One more thing to worry about in 2012 !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One more thing to worry about in 2012!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696206</id>
	<title>Re:Panic Averted - Resume Doing Nothing</title>
	<author>tlhIngan</author>
	<datestamp>1262972700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Worse than that, we'll continue to deal with the issues NAT causes, and I'm sure the various money grubbing ISP's will charge even more for additional IPs as we run out.</p></div></blockquote><p>And what makes you think ISPs won't charge per IP address on IPv6? Just because there's a lot of it, doesn't mean that they're going to give up a lucrative revenue source. Hell, they'll probably end up wasting most of it by having most of the addresses dropped at the router.</p><p>Hell, they'll probably make sure it doesn't work the way it should with stateless autoconfiguration to make the routing rules simple.</p><p>And we'll invent NATv6 to compensate.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Worse than that , we 'll continue to deal with the issues NAT causes , and I 'm sure the various money grubbing ISP 's will charge even more for additional IPs as we run out.And what makes you think ISPs wo n't charge per IP address on IPv6 ?
Just because there 's a lot of it , does n't mean that they 're going to give up a lucrative revenue source .
Hell , they 'll probably end up wasting most of it by having most of the addresses dropped at the router.Hell , they 'll probably make sure it does n't work the way it should with stateless autoconfiguration to make the routing rules simple.And we 'll invent NATv6 to compensate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Worse than that, we'll continue to deal with the issues NAT causes, and I'm sure the various money grubbing ISP's will charge even more for additional IPs as we run out.And what makes you think ISPs won't charge per IP address on IPv6?
Just because there's a lot of it, doesn't mean that they're going to give up a lucrative revenue source.
Hell, they'll probably end up wasting most of it by having most of the addresses dropped at the router.Hell, they'll probably make sure it doesn't work the way it should with stateless autoconfiguration to make the routing rules simple.And we'll invent NATv6 to compensate.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693788</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693772</id>
	<title>Re:What about the domain parking, tasting, sniping</title>
	<author>schmidt349</author>
	<datestamp>1262963100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Those practices waste domain names, not IP addresses. In theory you can map an infinite number of DNS names to a single IP. We may very well be having trouble with the depletion of semantically significant domain names, but those practices will not have any effect on IP availability.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those practices waste domain names , not IP addresses .
In theory you can map an infinite number of DNS names to a single IP .
We may very well be having trouble with the depletion of semantically significant domain names , but those practices will not have any effect on IP availability .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those practices waste domain names, not IP addresses.
In theory you can map an infinite number of DNS names to a single IP.
We may very well be having trouble with the depletion of semantically significant domain names, but those practices will not have any effect on IP availability.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693880</id>
	<title>Not entirely true</title>
	<author>macemoneta</author>
	<datestamp>1262963640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's the point at which IANA is no longer the one handing out addresses.  It's also the point at which the market for IP addresses opens, and companies start selling subnets.</p><p>There aren't 4.3 billion Internet facing IP addresses.  The bulk are held and used internally by companies (for no good reason).  People complain about NAT all the time, but it works.  How many Internet facing IP addresses are used by Google's quarter million servers?</p><p>$ host google.com<br>google.com has address 64.233.169.104<br>google.com has address 64.233.169.105<br>google.com has address 64.233.169.106<br>google.com has address 64.233.169.147<br>google.com has address 64.233.169.99<br>google.com has address 64.233.169.103</p><p>Does any company really need more than a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/29 subnet?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the point at which IANA is no longer the one handing out addresses .
It 's also the point at which the market for IP addresses opens , and companies start selling subnets.There are n't 4.3 billion Internet facing IP addresses .
The bulk are held and used internally by companies ( for no good reason ) .
People complain about NAT all the time , but it works .
How many Internet facing IP addresses are used by Google 's quarter million servers ? $ host google.comgoogle.com has address 64.233.169.104google.com has address 64.233.169.105google.com has address 64.233.169.106google.com has address 64.233.169.147google.com has address 64.233.169.99google.com has address 64.233.169.103Does any company really need more than a /29 subnet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the point at which IANA is no longer the one handing out addresses.
It's also the point at which the market for IP addresses opens, and companies start selling subnets.There aren't 4.3 billion Internet facing IP addresses.
The bulk are held and used internally by companies (for no good reason).
People complain about NAT all the time, but it works.
How many Internet facing IP addresses are used by Google's quarter million servers?$ host google.comgoogle.com has address 64.233.169.104google.com has address 64.233.169.105google.com has address 64.233.169.106google.com has address 64.233.169.147google.com has address 64.233.169.99google.com has address 64.233.169.103Does any company really need more than a /29 subnet?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696656</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>Dirtside</author>
	<datestamp>1262974500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>then every RIR gets one last<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/8 from the "final five"</p></div><p>And if BSG taught us anything, it's that the final five won't be who you expect!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>then every RIR gets one last /8 from the " final five " And if BSG taught us anything , it 's that the final five wo n't be who you expect !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>then every RIR gets one last /8 from the "final five"And if BSG taught us anything, it's that the final five won't be who you expect!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694110</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693712</id>
	<title>What about the domain parking, tasting, sniping...</title>
	<author>gapagos</author>
	<datestamp>1262962800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What about the countless meaningless sites that waste IPv4 addresses away, such as, Domain...<br>- parking<br>- tasting<br>- sniping<br>- squatting<br>- warehousing<br>- front running<br>and so on....<br>(see list of variations <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain\_parking" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain\_parking</a> [wikipedia.org]"&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain\_parking )</p><p>I bet those use a good 40\% of internet IPv4 addresses, and I wish we could reduce that number to 0\%.<br>It would not solve the lack of IPv4 addresses in the long run, but it would save us all a frustrating experience when browsing and/or trying to register a legitimate website.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What about the countless meaningless sites that waste IPv4 addresses away , such as , Domain...- parking- tasting- sniping- squatting- warehousing- front runningand so on.... ( see list of variations http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain \ _parking [ wikipedia.org ] " &gt; http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain \ _parking ) I bet those use a good 40 \ % of internet IPv4 addresses , and I wish we could reduce that number to 0 \ % .It would not solve the lack of IPv4 addresses in the long run , but it would save us all a frustrating experience when browsing and/or trying to register a legitimate website .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about the countless meaningless sites that waste IPv4 addresses away, such as, Domain...- parking- tasting- sniping- squatting- warehousing- front runningand so on....(see list of variations http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain\_parking [wikipedia.org]"&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain\_parking )I bet those use a good 40\% of internet IPv4 addresses, and I wish we could reduce that number to 0\%.It would not solve the lack of IPv4 addresses in the long run, but it would save us all a frustrating experience when browsing and/or trying to register a legitimate website.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696842</id>
	<title>Re:In other news....</title>
	<author>Dirtside</author>
	<datestamp>1262975220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd like to be able to use IPv6 from my work desktop. I'm behind a huge corporate firewall, so I'm not even sure where to get started. I'm running Ubuntu and my eth0 interface already has an IPv6 address, but any attempt to use ping6 or ssh -6 to reach external IPv6 addresses is met with "Network is unreachable". I'm guessing I need to configure my routes, because the "Next Hop" column when I run "route -nve -A inet6" is "::" for all 5 entries. (I'd paste it here but<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. is being bitchy about "too many junk characters".)</p><p>I have no idea what route info to add that might work; I'm pretty sure the firewall's configured with IPv6 addresses, but I don't know whether it will forward IPv6 packets, or what, or how to even check that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd like to be able to use IPv6 from my work desktop .
I 'm behind a huge corporate firewall , so I 'm not even sure where to get started .
I 'm running Ubuntu and my eth0 interface already has an IPv6 address , but any attempt to use ping6 or ssh -6 to reach external IPv6 addresses is met with " Network is unreachable " .
I 'm guessing I need to configure my routes , because the " Next Hop " column when I run " route -nve -A inet6 " is " : : " for all 5 entries .
( I 'd paste it here but / .
is being bitchy about " too many junk characters " .
) I have no idea what route info to add that might work ; I 'm pretty sure the firewall 's configured with IPv6 addresses , but I do n't know whether it will forward IPv6 packets , or what , or how to even check that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd like to be able to use IPv6 from my work desktop.
I'm behind a huge corporate firewall, so I'm not even sure where to get started.
I'm running Ubuntu and my eth0 interface already has an IPv6 address, but any attempt to use ping6 or ssh -6 to reach external IPv6 addresses is met with "Network is unreachable".
I'm guessing I need to configure my routes, because the "Next Hop" column when I run "route -nve -A inet6" is "::" for all 5 entries.
(I'd paste it here but /.
is being bitchy about "too many junk characters".
)I have no idea what route info to add that might work; I'm pretty sure the firewall's configured with IPv6 addresses, but I don't know whether it will forward IPv6 packets, or what, or how to even check that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694186</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693694</id>
	<title>Increase in domain value?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262962740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does this imply that the value of latexcybersluts.com will increase, because someone (like Goldman Sachs) may buy the domain to reuse its IP address, thereby also stealing customers who use IP bookmarks?</p><p>If you are launching a site and there's no IPs around, will a value of $10-20 be unstomachable?</p><p>Will we see offers going out from ISPs to owners of little-visited domains asking if they would be interested in a buyback?</p><p>Solution: We need IP trading exchanges!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does this imply that the value of latexcybersluts.com will increase , because someone ( like Goldman Sachs ) may buy the domain to reuse its IP address , thereby also stealing customers who use IP bookmarks ? If you are launching a site and there 's no IPs around , will a value of $ 10-20 be unstomachable ? Will we see offers going out from ISPs to owners of little-visited domains asking if they would be interested in a buyback ? Solution : We need IP trading exchanges !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does this imply that the value of latexcybersluts.com will increase, because someone (like Goldman Sachs) may buy the domain to reuse its IP address, thereby also stealing customers who use IP bookmarks?If you are launching a site and there's no IPs around, will a value of $10-20 be unstomachable?Will we see offers going out from ISPs to owners of little-visited domains asking if they would be interested in a buyback?Solution: We need IP trading exchanges!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693828</id>
	<title>Could last another 10 years...</title>
	<author>geekmux</author>
	<datestamp>1262963400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...if we actually went after those who currently hold "monster"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/8 and even<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/16 blocks that aren't doing squat (pun intended) with them.</p><p>I found my college campus computer lab has all of their workstations on the live Internet.  No shit.  Turned off the XP firewall and I'm pinging it.  Props for them actually USING part of the monster<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/16 block they're assigned, but damn, talk about a Security nightmare...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...if we actually went after those who currently hold " monster " /8 and even /16 blocks that are n't doing squat ( pun intended ) with them.I found my college campus computer lab has all of their workstations on the live Internet .
No shit .
Turned off the XP firewall and I 'm pinging it .
Props for them actually USING part of the monster /16 block they 're assigned , but damn , talk about a Security nightmare.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...if we actually went after those who currently hold "monster" /8 and even /16 blocks that aren't doing squat (pun intended) with them.I found my college campus computer lab has all of their workstations on the live Internet.
No shit.
Turned off the XP firewall and I'm pinging it.
Props for them actually USING part of the monster /16 block they're assigned, but damn, talk about a Security nightmare...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697906</id>
	<title>Re:I genuinely wish they would just give it all aw</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262979600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I dont see that ever happening. If theres money to be made in re-selling your ip address, ISPS will just put us all behind NAT and sell their IP space. Not to mention all the big companies that own<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/8 blocks that could easily sell off large chunks.</p><p>If anything I just see an extension to DNS coming out that allows you to point a domain name to some kind of IP:NATIP block, and maybe even integrating ports in there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I dont see that ever happening .
If theres money to be made in re-selling your ip address , ISPS will just put us all behind NAT and sell their IP space .
Not to mention all the big companies that own /8 blocks that could easily sell off large chunks.If anything I just see an extension to DNS coming out that allows you to point a domain name to some kind of IP : NATIP block , and maybe even integrating ports in there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I dont see that ever happening.
If theres money to be made in re-selling your ip address, ISPS will just put us all behind NAT and sell their IP space.
Not to mention all the big companies that own /8 blocks that could easily sell off large chunks.If anything I just see an extension to DNS coming out that allows you to point a domain name to some kind of IP:NATIP block, and maybe even integrating ports in there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693796</id>
	<title>Re:What about the domain parking, tasting, sniping</title>
	<author>gandhi\_2</author>
	<datestamp>1262963220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/vhosts/name-based.html" title="apache.org">lern 2 internets</a> [apache.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>lern 2 internets [ apache.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>lern 2 internets [apache.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694266</id>
	<title>Nope</title>
	<author>Cyberax</author>
	<datestamp>1262965620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No.</p><p>Model which is used to predict the time when IPv4 addresses run out is actually quite good. See here:  <a href="http://www.inetcore.com/project/ipv4ec/index\_en.html" title="inetcore.com">http://www.inetcore.com/project/ipv4ec/index\_en.html</a> [inetcore.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No.Model which is used to predict the time when IPv4 addresses run out is actually quite good .
See here : http : //www.inetcore.com/project/ipv4ec/index \ _en.html [ inetcore.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.Model which is used to predict the time when IPv4 addresses run out is actually quite good.
See here:  http://www.inetcore.com/project/ipv4ec/index\_en.html [inetcore.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693746</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694816</id>
	<title>NAT ISP...</title>
	<author>proton</author>
	<datestamp>1262967780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My ISP changed their network a couple of months ago. I have broadband, what they call broadband anyways, but now they only assign local addresses (192.168.x.x) to our home computers and proxy our shit... pisses me off, but what can I do, Im locked into an email address I dont want to change...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My ISP changed their network a couple of months ago .
I have broadband , what they call broadband anyways , but now they only assign local addresses ( 192.168.x.x ) to our home computers and proxy our shit... pisses me off , but what can I do , Im locked into an email address I dont want to change.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My ISP changed their network a couple of months ago.
I have broadband, what they call broadband anyways, but now they only assign local addresses (192.168.x.x) to our home computers and proxy our shit... pisses me off, but what can I do, Im locked into an email address I dont want to change...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693866</id>
	<title>Whats the point?  A three year old estimate is off</title>
	<author>Troy Roberts</author>
	<datestamp>1262963580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Big F...ing deal!  How many predictions are accurate for three or more years? The original prediction was made in May, 2007 and current prediction has slipped the date from December 2, 2010 to November 18, 2012 not quite a 2 years.  I challenge anyone to find accurate predictions that are 3 1/2 years old.</p><p>We need to be moving to IPV6 as quickly as possible.  We may have a bit longer than was predicted 3 1/2 years ago.  The thing that is scary is have we made much progress in moving to IPV6 in the last 3 1/2 year?  I think not much.  So, whatever the actual exhaustion dates are for IPV4 address.  We can be certain that we are 3 1/2 years closer than we were and we have done almost nothing to prepare.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Big F...ing deal !
How many predictions are accurate for three or more years ?
The original prediction was made in May , 2007 and current prediction has slipped the date from December 2 , 2010 to November 18 , 2012 not quite a 2 years .
I challenge anyone to find accurate predictions that are 3 1/2 years old.We need to be moving to IPV6 as quickly as possible .
We may have a bit longer than was predicted 3 1/2 years ago .
The thing that is scary is have we made much progress in moving to IPV6 in the last 3 1/2 year ?
I think not much .
So , whatever the actual exhaustion dates are for IPV4 address .
We can be certain that we are 3 1/2 years closer than we were and we have done almost nothing to prepare .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Big F...ing deal!
How many predictions are accurate for three or more years?
The original prediction was made in May, 2007 and current prediction has slipped the date from December 2, 2010 to November 18, 2012 not quite a 2 years.
I challenge anyone to find accurate predictions that are 3 1/2 years old.We need to be moving to IPV6 as quickly as possible.
We may have a bit longer than was predicted 3 1/2 years ago.
The thing that is scary is have we made much progress in moving to IPV6 in the last 3 1/2 year?
I think not much.
So, whatever the actual exhaustion dates are for IPV4 address.
We can be certain that we are 3 1/2 years closer than we were and we have done almost nothing to prepare.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30698602</id>
	<title>400-foot dogs</title>
	<author>Citizen of Earth</author>
	<datestamp>1262982720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If most IANA analysts watched a puppy growing the the first month of its life, they'd conclude that it'll be a 400-foot tall monster trashing downtown Tokyo in two years.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If most IANA analysts watched a puppy growing the the first month of its life , they 'd conclude that it 'll be a 400-foot tall monster trashing downtown Tokyo in two years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If most IANA analysts watched a puppy growing the the first month of its life, they'd conclude that it'll be a 400-foot tall monster trashing downtown Tokyo in two years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693946</id>
	<title>Re:IPv4 doesn't die</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262964120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Old programmers don't die, they just use an exploit to induce an overflow in the "time left to live" counter that runs the Reaper's scheduler.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Old programmers do n't die , they just use an exploit to induce an overflow in the " time left to live " counter that runs the Reaper 's scheduler .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Old programmers don't die, they just use an exploit to induce an overflow in the "time left to live" counter that runs the Reaper's scheduler.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693602</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693978</id>
	<title>Re:IPv4 doesn't die</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262964300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IPv4 will die shortly after x86 does, which is to say: a long time from now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IPv4 will die shortly after x86 does , which is to say : a long time from now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IPv4 will die shortly after x86 does, which is to say: a long time from now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693602</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694662</id>
	<title>Re:2012</title>
	<author>jack2000</author>
	<datestamp>1262967360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah if only there was a way to assign names to these hard to remember numbers, universal names that anyone can use to get to that exact ip address that they wanted. Dumb people will use the name system all the time! <br>
OH I KNOW! We'll name it DUMB NAME SYSTEM!  DNS for short!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah if only there was a way to assign names to these hard to remember numbers , universal names that anyone can use to get to that exact ip address that they wanted .
Dumb people will use the name system all the time !
OH I KNOW !
We 'll name it DUMB NAME SYSTEM !
DNS for short !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah if only there was a way to assign names to these hard to remember numbers, universal names that anyone can use to get to that exact ip address that they wanted.
Dumb people will use the name system all the time!
OH I KNOW!
We'll name it DUMB NAME SYSTEM!
DNS for short!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693840</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694068</id>
	<title>Re:Could last another 10 years...</title>
	<author>PolygamousRanchKid </author>
	<datestamp>1262964780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>...if we actually went after those who currently hold "monster"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/8 and even<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/16 blocks that aren't doing squat (pun intended) with them.</p></div><p>When the IPv4 addresses run out, those "monster" holders will be doing something with them.  Selling them.
</p><p>The "monster" holders are big IT players, and they would never give away something that they see could be a valuable asset in the future.
</p><p>Go knock at HP's door, with a bowl in your hand, and say: "Please, Sir, can I have some more IPv4 addresses?"
</p><p>"More?  You want MORE!"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...if we actually went after those who currently hold " monster " /8 and even /16 blocks that are n't doing squat ( pun intended ) with them.When the IPv4 addresses run out , those " monster " holders will be doing something with them .
Selling them .
The " monster " holders are big IT players , and they would never give away something that they see could be a valuable asset in the future .
Go knock at HP 's door , with a bowl in your hand , and say : " Please , Sir , can I have some more IPv4 addresses ?
" " More ?
You want MORE !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...if we actually went after those who currently hold "monster" /8 and even /16 blocks that aren't doing squat (pun intended) with them.When the IPv4 addresses run out, those "monster" holders will be doing something with them.
Selling them.
The "monster" holders are big IT players, and they would never give away something that they see could be a valuable asset in the future.
Go knock at HP's door, with a bowl in your hand, and say: "Please, Sir, can I have some more IPv4 addresses?
"
"More?
You want MORE!
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697278</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262977080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><blockquote><div><p>It's also the point at which the market for IP addresses opens, and companies start selling subnets.</p></div></blockquote><p>No. Repeat after me, there is no market in IPv4 addresses. The current rule is that when a RIR requests a block from IANA that would bring the IANA pool below 5<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/8s, then every RIR gets one last<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/8 from the "final five". Then IANA is done and the RIRs have whatever addresses they have left in their unused pool. For AfrNIC it'll last decades, for APNIC/ARIN it's curtains in about a year.</p><p>There is no market in IPv4. There never will be, because reclaiming addresses is too hard and routing can't handle it atm (routing too small blocks). Let's switch to IPv6 already, for fuck's sake, we'll have to do that anyway even if a miracle happens, technical problems get worked out and someone sets up an IPv4 market, about 6 months after.</p></div><p>IANA does more than just IPv4 address; it does all the protocol registries created by the IETF, the enterprise numbers used in SNMP, and, oh by the way, the IPv6 addresses.  It's v4 pool is exhausted then, but the organization is not done.</p><p>And there will be a market in v4 addresses.  Every RIR has a policy in place which allows that to emerge from its current grey market into the light.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's also the point at which the market for IP addresses opens , and companies start selling subnets.No .
Repeat after me , there is no market in IPv4 addresses .
The current rule is that when a RIR requests a block from IANA that would bring the IANA pool below 5 /8s , then every RIR gets one last /8 from the " final five " .
Then IANA is done and the RIRs have whatever addresses they have left in their unused pool .
For AfrNIC it 'll last decades , for APNIC/ARIN it 's curtains in about a year.There is no market in IPv4 .
There never will be , because reclaiming addresses is too hard and routing ca n't handle it atm ( routing too small blocks ) .
Let 's switch to IPv6 already , for fuck 's sake , we 'll have to do that anyway even if a miracle happens , technical problems get worked out and someone sets up an IPv4 market , about 6 months after.IANA does more than just IPv4 address ; it does all the protocol registries created by the IETF , the enterprise numbers used in SNMP , and , oh by the way , the IPv6 addresses .
It 's v4 pool is exhausted then , but the organization is not done.And there will be a market in v4 addresses .
Every RIR has a policy in place which allows that to emerge from its current grey market into the light .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's also the point at which the market for IP addresses opens, and companies start selling subnets.No.
Repeat after me, there is no market in IPv4 addresses.
The current rule is that when a RIR requests a block from IANA that would bring the IANA pool below 5 /8s, then every RIR gets one last /8 from the "final five".
Then IANA is done and the RIRs have whatever addresses they have left in their unused pool.
For AfrNIC it'll last decades, for APNIC/ARIN it's curtains in about a year.There is no market in IPv4.
There never will be, because reclaiming addresses is too hard and routing can't handle it atm (routing too small blocks).
Let's switch to IPv6 already, for fuck's sake, we'll have to do that anyway even if a miracle happens, technical problems get worked out and someone sets up an IPv4 market, about 6 months after.IANA does more than just IPv4 address; it does all the protocol registries created by the IETF, the enterprise numbers used in SNMP, and, oh by the way, the IPv6 addresses.
It's v4 pool is exhausted then, but the organization is not done.And there will be a market in v4 addresses.
Every RIR has a policy in place which allows that to emerge from its current grey market into the light.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694110</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694110</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>A beautiful mind</author>
	<datestamp>1262965020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>It's also the point at which the market for IP addresses opens, and companies start selling subnets.</p></div></blockquote><p>
No. Repeat after me, there is no market in IPv4 addresses. The current rule is that when a RIR requests a block from IANA that would bring the IANA pool below 5<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/8s, then every RIR gets one last<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/8 from the "final five". Then IANA is done and the RIRs have whatever addresses they have left in their unused pool. For AfrNIC it'll last decades, for APNIC/ARIN it's curtains in about a year.<br> <br>
There is no market in IPv4. There never will be, because reclaiming addresses is too hard and routing can't handle it atm (routing too small blocks). Let's switch to IPv6 already, for fuck's sake, we'll have to do that anyway even if a miracle happens, technical problems get worked out and someone sets up an IPv4 market, about 6 months after.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's also the point at which the market for IP addresses opens , and companies start selling subnets .
No. Repeat after me , there is no market in IPv4 addresses .
The current rule is that when a RIR requests a block from IANA that would bring the IANA pool below 5 /8s , then every RIR gets one last /8 from the " final five " .
Then IANA is done and the RIRs have whatever addresses they have left in their unused pool .
For AfrNIC it 'll last decades , for APNIC/ARIN it 's curtains in about a year .
There is no market in IPv4 .
There never will be , because reclaiming addresses is too hard and routing ca n't handle it atm ( routing too small blocks ) .
Let 's switch to IPv6 already , for fuck 's sake , we 'll have to do that anyway even if a miracle happens , technical problems get worked out and someone sets up an IPv4 market , about 6 months after .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's also the point at which the market for IP addresses opens, and companies start selling subnets.
No. Repeat after me, there is no market in IPv4 addresses.
The current rule is that when a RIR requests a block from IANA that would bring the IANA pool below 5 /8s, then every RIR gets one last /8 from the "final five".
Then IANA is done and the RIRs have whatever addresses they have left in their unused pool.
For AfrNIC it'll last decades, for APNIC/ARIN it's curtains in about a year.
There is no market in IPv4.
There never will be, because reclaiming addresses is too hard and routing can't handle it atm (routing too small blocks).
Let's switch to IPv6 already, for fuck's sake, we'll have to do that anyway even if a miracle happens, technical problems get worked out and someone sets up an IPv4 market, about 6 months after.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696390</id>
	<title>Re:killer app</title>
	<author>omnichad</author>
	<datestamp>1262973420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>More web servers on the Internet that need new IP addresses is all it takes.  If you have to start assigning them IPv6 addresses, then all the consumers will need to be able to connect out to them.  Done.  Need created.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More web servers on the Internet that need new IP addresses is all it takes .
If you have to start assigning them IPv6 addresses , then all the consumers will need to be able to connect out to them .
Done. Need created .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More web servers on the Internet that need new IP addresses is all it takes.
If you have to start assigning them IPv6 addresses, then all the consumers will need to be able to connect out to them.
Done.  Need created.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697532</id>
	<title>We all know its going to happen in 2012!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262978100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is what the Mayan predicted.... the end of the world (IPv4 running out of addresses)... on December 21, 2012.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is what the Mayan predicted.... the end of the world ( IPv4 running out of addresses ) ... on December 21 , 2012 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is what the Mayan predicted.... the end of the world (IPv4 running out of addresses)... on December 21, 2012.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694764</id>
	<title>Re:Panic Averted - Resume Doing Nothing</title>
	<author>prandal</author>
	<datestamp>1262967660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So the question we each need to ask, on behalf of ourselves and our employers, is <b>how long will it take to transition my/our setup to IPV6?</b></p><p>If the answer is greater than 2 years, it would be prudent to start doing something about it now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So the question we each need to ask , on behalf of ourselves and our employers , is how long will it take to transition my/our setup to IPV6 ? If the answer is greater than 2 years , it would be prudent to start doing something about it now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So the question we each need to ask, on behalf of ourselves and our employers, is how long will it take to transition my/our setup to IPV6?If the answer is greater than 2 years, it would be prudent to start doing something about it now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697118</id>
	<title>How long until /. is IPv6?</title>
	<author>wowbagger</author>
	<datestamp>1262976420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Once again, I'll ask a simple question:</p><p>How long until it is possible to pull up the main page on Slashdot, using nothing but IPv6 packets?</p><p>IMHO, every time one of these "OMFG IPv4 gonna run out RSN!!!1!11!" stores hits the front page, the Slashcrew should have to state where THEY are in becoming IPv6, and what is preventing them from doing so already.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Once again , I 'll ask a simple question : How long until it is possible to pull up the main page on Slashdot , using nothing but IPv6 packets ? IMHO , every time one of these " OMFG IPv4 gon na run out RSN ! ! ! 1 ! 11 !
" stores hits the front page , the Slashcrew should have to state where THEY are in becoming IPv6 , and what is preventing them from doing so already .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once again, I'll ask a simple question:How long until it is possible to pull up the main page on Slashdot, using nothing but IPv6 packets?IMHO, every time one of these "OMFG IPv4 gonna run out RSN!!!1!11!
" stores hits the front page, the Slashcrew should have to state where THEY are in becoming IPv6, and what is preventing them from doing so already.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30698022</id>
	<title>IPv4 Exhaustion Counter</title>
	<author>flam3boy</author>
	<datestamp>1262980020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Check this site to see how many days and IP's are left:

<a href="http://inetcore.com/project/ipv4ec/index\_en.html" title="inetcore.com" rel="nofollow">http://inetcore.com/project/ipv4ec/index\_en.html</a> [inetcore.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Check this site to see how many days and IP 's are left : http : //inetcore.com/project/ipv4ec/index \ _en.html [ inetcore.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Check this site to see how many days and IP's are left:

http://inetcore.com/project/ipv4ec/index\_en.html [inetcore.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30704062</id>
	<title>IPv4 will stick around, static address will go</title>
	<author>MasterOfGoingFaster</author>
	<datestamp>1262967600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IPv4 will last a lot longer than expected or desired.  Short term, the price of a fixed IP address will shoot up like a rocket. So why would an ISP want to spend money to devalue that?</p><p>This will drive a new method of finding a way to link a URL to a non-static IP address, and the change in the flow of money will make a lot of us think "why didn't I think of that?"</p><p>Hey, most people just Google the site name anyway, so as long as you tell Google what today's IP address is, you don't need static.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IPv4 will last a lot longer than expected or desired .
Short term , the price of a fixed IP address will shoot up like a rocket .
So why would an ISP want to spend money to devalue that ? This will drive a new method of finding a way to link a URL to a non-static IP address , and the change in the flow of money will make a lot of us think " why did n't I think of that ?
" Hey , most people just Google the site name anyway , so as long as you tell Google what today 's IP address is , you do n't need static .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IPv4 will last a lot longer than expected or desired.
Short term, the price of a fixed IP address will shoot up like a rocket.
So why would an ISP want to spend money to devalue that?This will drive a new method of finding a way to link a URL to a non-static IP address, and the change in the flow of money will make a lot of us think "why didn't I think of that?
"Hey, most people just Google the site name anyway, so as long as you tell Google what today's IP address is, you don't need static.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696054</id>
	<title>Re:Could last another 10 years...</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1262972100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>they don't call them monsters for nothing.</p><p>Actually getting them to cough up their unneeded allocations will be a hellish fight.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>they do n't call them monsters for nothing.Actually getting them to cough up their unneeded allocations will be a hellish fight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they don't call them monsters for nothing.Actually getting them to cough up their unneeded allocations will be a hellish fight.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694702</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>bbn</author>
	<datestamp>1262967420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>$ host google.com<br>google.com has address 74.125.43.104<br>google.com has address 74.125.43.105<br>google.com has address 74.125.43.147<br>google.com has address 74.125.43.103<br>google.com has address 74.125.43.99<br>google.com has address 74.125.43.106</p><p>Looks like Google just had you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>$ host google.comgoogle.com has address 74.125.43.104google.com has address 74.125.43.105google.com has address 74.125.43.147google.com has address 74.125.43.103google.com has address 74.125.43.99google.com has address 74.125.43.106Looks like Google just had you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$ host google.comgoogle.com has address 74.125.43.104google.com has address 74.125.43.105google.com has address 74.125.43.147google.com has address 74.125.43.103google.com has address 74.125.43.99google.com has address 74.125.43.106Looks like Google just had you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694520</id>
	<title>an honest question:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262966700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>speaking honestly from a position of ignorance on the issue: is there anything about the ipv6 spec that lends itself better to censorship and control? in other words, could china or iran do their authoritarian bullshit easier with ipv6 than with ipv4?</p><p>depending upon the answer, i will either support ipv6 adaptation, or fight giving up ipv4 until the bitter end</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>speaking honestly from a position of ignorance on the issue : is there anything about the ipv6 spec that lends itself better to censorship and control ?
in other words , could china or iran do their authoritarian bullshit easier with ipv6 than with ipv4 ? depending upon the answer , i will either support ipv6 adaptation , or fight giving up ipv4 until the bitter end</tokentext>
<sentencetext>speaking honestly from a position of ignorance on the issue: is there anything about the ipv6 spec that lends itself better to censorship and control?
in other words, could china or iran do their authoritarian bullshit easier with ipv6 than with ipv4?depending upon the answer, i will either support ipv6 adaptation, or fight giving up ipv4 until the bitter end</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693840</id>
	<title>2012</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262963460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>ONOZ! RUN! 2012 is also coming in the internet world!

Well, more seriously, there is IPv6 so we don't have to worry for now(except for the harder to memorize addresses of the IPv6)

I wonder how much we have left of IPv6? Maybe 2-3 decades? nahhh lets just wait until we have less than 10\%(IPv6 Addresses) to make speculations.</htmltext>
<tokenext>ONOZ !
RUN ! 2012 is also coming in the internet world !
Well , more seriously , there is IPv6 so we do n't have to worry for now ( except for the harder to memorize addresses of the IPv6 ) I wonder how much we have left of IPv6 ?
Maybe 2-3 decades ?
nahhh lets just wait until we have less than 10 \ % ( IPv6 Addresses ) to make speculations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ONOZ!
RUN! 2012 is also coming in the internet world!
Well, more seriously, there is IPv6 so we don't have to worry for now(except for the harder to memorize addresses of the IPv6)

I wonder how much we have left of IPv6?
Maybe 2-3 decades?
nahhh lets just wait until we have less than 10\%(IPv6 Addresses) to make speculations.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697560</id>
	<title>Re:2012</title>
	<author>Bigjeff5</author>
	<datestamp>1262978160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dumb sounds mean, we'll just call it Dynamic, what a sexy word that is!  We can add exclamation points too, to make it even more exciting!</p><p>Dynamic! Name System, or D!NS!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dumb sounds mean , we 'll just call it Dynamic , what a sexy word that is !
We can add exclamation points too , to make it even more exciting ! Dynamic !
Name System , or D ! NS !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dumb sounds mean, we'll just call it Dynamic, what a sexy word that is!
We can add exclamation points too, to make it even more exciting!Dynamic!
Name System, or D!NS!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694662</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697814</id>
	<title>Re:I genuinely wish they would just give it all aw</title>
	<author>the\_one(2)</author>
	<datestamp>1262979240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Individual nations could always mandate switching like they did with digital TV</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Individual nations could always mandate switching like they did with digital TV</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Individual nations could always mandate switching like they did with digital TV</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696150</id>
	<title>Re:Guess we'll just going to have to have...</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1262972460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And what's up with IP addresses being freaking HARD WIRED into devices?</p><p>That could just as much be laziness as a big fat "mine mine mine"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And what 's up with IP addresses being freaking HARD WIRED into devices ? That could just as much be laziness as a big fat " mine mine mine "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And what's up with IP addresses being freaking HARD WIRED into devices?That could just as much be laziness as a big fat "mine mine mine"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693894</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694020</id>
	<title>STUPID</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262964540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Whether or not the issue will be forced, the problem is that for most of the developing world they already are either running out or pretty damn close. Because of this, if the US doesn't jump on the band wagon we will continue to be outpaced by countries like China that are already neck deep in rolling out IPv6. This isn't a matter of when, just if, and really ought to be done gradually, but quickly, rather than wait till a moment to be forced. I encourage anyone that can to move as quick as they can towards this rather than sit and wait and watch the world pass them by.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Whether or not the issue will be forced , the problem is that for most of the developing world they already are either running out or pretty damn close .
Because of this , if the US does n't jump on the band wagon we will continue to be outpaced by countries like China that are already neck deep in rolling out IPv6 .
This is n't a matter of when , just if , and really ought to be done gradually , but quickly , rather than wait till a moment to be forced .
I encourage anyone that can to move as quick as they can towards this rather than sit and wait and watch the world pass them by .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whether or not the issue will be forced, the problem is that for most of the developing world they already are either running out or pretty damn close.
Because of this, if the US doesn't jump on the band wagon we will continue to be outpaced by countries like China that are already neck deep in rolling out IPv6.
This isn't a matter of when, just if, and really ought to be done gradually, but quickly, rather than wait till a moment to be forced.
I encourage anyone that can to move as quick as they can towards this rather than sit and wait and watch the world pass them by.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693934</id>
	<title>Re:Panic Averted - Resume Doing Nothing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262964000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It goes hand in hand with our doing nothing about global warming policy (the hope being once that kicks in it'll reduce the populace and free up some IPs). Stay the course.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It goes hand in hand with our doing nothing about global warming policy ( the hope being once that kicks in it 'll reduce the populace and free up some IPs ) .
Stay the course .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It goes hand in hand with our doing nothing about global warming policy (the hope being once that kicks in it'll reduce the populace and free up some IPs).
Stay the course.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30700208</id>
	<title>IPv4</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262945880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IPv4 should be enough for anyone!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IPv4 should be enough for anyone !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IPv4 should be enough for anyone!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697172</id>
	<title>I have IPv6 and don't know why</title>
	<author>SmilingBoy</author>
	<datestamp>1262976660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Apparently, my wireless ADSL modem router (a Fritz!box 7270) has default support, and so does Windows 7.  I didn't enable it either on my router nor on my Windows Laptop.  Yet, I am currently assigned both a IPv4 and an IPv6 address.  Of course, my ISP doesn't offer it, so I guess this would just be useful for communication within my LAN.

Is it normal now that home routers offer IPv6 addresses or is the Fritz!box an exception? Who else has IPv6 on the network without excessive configurations/upgrades?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apparently , my wireless ADSL modem router ( a Fritz ! box 7270 ) has default support , and so does Windows 7 .
I did n't enable it either on my router nor on my Windows Laptop .
Yet , I am currently assigned both a IPv4 and an IPv6 address .
Of course , my ISP does n't offer it , so I guess this would just be useful for communication within my LAN .
Is it normal now that home routers offer IPv6 addresses or is the Fritz ! box an exception ?
Who else has IPv6 on the network without excessive configurations/upgrades ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apparently, my wireless ADSL modem router (a Fritz!box 7270) has default support, and so does Windows 7.
I didn't enable it either on my router nor on my Windows Laptop.
Yet, I am currently assigned both a IPv4 and an IPv6 address.
Of course, my ISP doesn't offer it, so I guess this would just be useful for communication within my LAN.
Is it normal now that home routers offer IPv6 addresses or is the Fritz!box an exception?
Who else has IPv6 on the network without excessive configurations/upgrades?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694282</id>
	<title>killer app</title>
	<author>jmyers</author>
	<datestamp>1262965680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For ipv6 to get widespread use there has to be a killer app that people (businesses or consumers) want or think they must have. I don't mean what geeks want or think they must have. The masses of sheeple are perfectly happy if everything is NAT'd.</p><p>I have no idea what this app may be, but it could be some cloud service that everyone wants and is only made available via ipv6 technology. Customers will demand that ISPs support it so they can use the product.</p><p>migration away from ipv4 for strictly technical reasons is not going to happen. By the time the killer app comes along it may be something other than ipv6 that takes over. Whatever happens it will not be for technical reasons or to make the network "better" it will be because clueless people want it.<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For ipv6 to get widespread use there has to be a killer app that people ( businesses or consumers ) want or think they must have .
I do n't mean what geeks want or think they must have .
The masses of sheeple are perfectly happy if everything is NAT 'd.I have no idea what this app may be , but it could be some cloud service that everyone wants and is only made available via ipv6 technology .
Customers will demand that ISPs support it so they can use the product.migration away from ipv4 for strictly technical reasons is not going to happen .
By the time the killer app comes along it may be something other than ipv6 that takes over .
Whatever happens it will not be for technical reasons or to make the network " better " it will be because clueless people want it .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>For ipv6 to get widespread use there has to be a killer app that people (businesses or consumers) want or think they must have.
I don't mean what geeks want or think they must have.
The masses of sheeple are perfectly happy if everything is NAT'd.I have no idea what this app may be, but it could be some cloud service that everyone wants and is only made available via ipv6 technology.
Customers will demand that ISPs support it so they can use the product.migration away from ipv4 for strictly technical reasons is not going to happen.
By the time the killer app comes along it may be something other than ipv6 that takes over.
Whatever happens it will not be for technical reasons or to make the network "better" it will be because clueless people want it.
 </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30695750</id>
	<title>Re:Guess we'll just going to have to have...</title>
	<author>noidentity</author>
	<datestamp>1262971080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm not following how we'll run out. IP addresses are sort of like gold; they never get consumed, just used for a while, then perhaps sold to someone else. Even if the current allocator of IP addresses runs empty, there will still be the owners of the 4.3 billion addresses out there. I'm also guessing that the current seller has some sort of fixed price, which tends to suppress the natural market signal of a higher price that tells others that they're scarce and not to buy them unless they are really needed. No matter, though, once they "run out" and others start selling, the price will rise to an appropriate level.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not following how we 'll run out .
IP addresses are sort of like gold ; they never get consumed , just used for a while , then perhaps sold to someone else .
Even if the current allocator of IP addresses runs empty , there will still be the owners of the 4.3 billion addresses out there .
I 'm also guessing that the current seller has some sort of fixed price , which tends to suppress the natural market signal of a higher price that tells others that they 're scarce and not to buy them unless they are really needed .
No matter , though , once they " run out " and others start selling , the price will rise to an appropriate level .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not following how we'll run out.
IP addresses are sort of like gold; they never get consumed, just used for a while, then perhaps sold to someone else.
Even if the current allocator of IP addresses runs empty, there will still be the owners of the 4.3 billion addresses out there.
I'm also guessing that the current seller has some sort of fixed price, which tends to suppress the natural market signal of a higher price that tells others that they're scarce and not to buy them unless they are really needed.
No matter, though, once they "run out" and others start selling, the price will rise to an appropriate level.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693894</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693788</id>
	<title>Re:Panic Averted - Resume Doing Nothing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262963220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Worse than that, we'll continue to deal with the issues NAT causes, and I'm sure the various money grubbing ISP's will charge even more for additional IPs as we run out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Worse than that , we 'll continue to deal with the issues NAT causes , and I 'm sure the various money grubbing ISP 's will charge even more for additional IPs as we run out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Worse than that, we'll continue to deal with the issues NAT causes, and I'm sure the various money grubbing ISP's will charge even more for additional IPs as we run out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694010</id>
	<title>Re:What about the domain parking, tasting, sniping</title>
	<author>gclef</author>
	<datestamp>1262964480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If  you'd read the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain\_tasting" title="wikipedia.org">Domain Tasting wiki article</a> [wikipedia.org] rather that just ranting, you would have found the following:</p><blockquote><div><p>ICANN reported in August 2009, that prior to implementing excess domain deletion charges, the peak month for domain tastings was over 15 million domain names. After the $0.20 fee was implemented, this dropped to around 2 million domain names per month. As a result of the further increase in charges for excess domain deletions, implemented starting April 2009, the number of domain tastings dropped to below 60 thousand per month.</p></div></blockquote><p>In short, not only have you mis-understood how many IPs the abusers are using (as others have pointed out), you're also behind the times for what people are doing about that behaviour.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 'd read the Domain Tasting wiki article [ wikipedia.org ] rather that just ranting , you would have found the following : ICANN reported in August 2009 , that prior to implementing excess domain deletion charges , the peak month for domain tastings was over 15 million domain names .
After the $ 0.20 fee was implemented , this dropped to around 2 million domain names per month .
As a result of the further increase in charges for excess domain deletions , implemented starting April 2009 , the number of domain tastings dropped to below 60 thousand per month.In short , not only have you mis-understood how many IPs the abusers are using ( as others have pointed out ) , you 're also behind the times for what people are doing about that behaviour .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If  you'd read the Domain Tasting wiki article [wikipedia.org] rather that just ranting, you would have found the following:ICANN reported in August 2009, that prior to implementing excess domain deletion charges, the peak month for domain tastings was over 15 million domain names.
After the $0.20 fee was implemented, this dropped to around 2 million domain names per month.
As a result of the further increase in charges for excess domain deletions, implemented starting April 2009, the number of domain tastings dropped to below 60 thousand per month.In short, not only have you mis-understood how many IPs the abusers are using (as others have pointed out), you're also behind the times for what people are doing about that behaviour.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30695540</id>
	<title>Magic 2-Year Mark</title>
	<author>Ltap</author>
	<datestamp>1262970360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why is it that, whenever something is supposed to happen, it's perpetually 2 years from now? This seems like a pretty common phenomenon in tech - mostly due to the vanishing point for new tech being several years (startups tend to not last very long, so having 2 years of R&amp;D on something usually means it will never be finished). Anyone got other examples/ideas?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is it that , whenever something is supposed to happen , it 's perpetually 2 years from now ?
This seems like a pretty common phenomenon in tech - mostly due to the vanishing point for new tech being several years ( startups tend to not last very long , so having 2 years of R&amp;D on something usually means it will never be finished ) .
Anyone got other examples/ideas ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is it that, whenever something is supposed to happen, it's perpetually 2 years from now?
This seems like a pretty common phenomenon in tech - mostly due to the vanishing point for new tech being several years (startups tend to not last very long, so having 2 years of R&amp;D on something usually means it will never be finished).
Anyone got other examples/ideas?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693764</id>
	<title>Re:What about the domain parking, tasting, sniping</title>
	<author>confused one</author>
	<datestamp>1262963040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Having a domain name does not mean you have an unique IP address assigned to it.  It's not one-to-one.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Having a domain name does not mean you have an unique IP address assigned to it .
It 's not one-to-one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having a domain name does not mean you have an unique IP address assigned to it.
It's not one-to-one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694426</id>
	<title>Again?</title>
	<author>jimpop</author>
	<datestamp>1262966220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>no, really? AGAIN?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>no , really ?
AGAIN ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>no, really?
AGAIN?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696220</id>
	<title>Old News -- Dupe</title>
	<author>sconeu</author>
	<datestamp>1262972760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You mean just like they said <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=10/01/03/2358233" title="slashdot.org">here</a> [slashdot.org]?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You mean just like they said here [ slashdot.org ] ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You mean just like they said here [slashdot.org]?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694374</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262966040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>People complain about NAT all the time, but it works.</p></div><p>Really? Today I had to tunnel through my dedicated server to view a website, because they banned the shared IP my UMTS-provider uses for NATing its customers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>People complain about NAT all the time , but it works.Really ?
Today I had to tunnel through my dedicated server to view a website , because they banned the shared IP my UMTS-provider uses for NATing its customers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People complain about NAT all the time, but it works.Really?
Today I had to tunnel through my dedicated server to view a website, because they banned the shared IP my UMTS-provider uses for NATing its customers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693984</id>
	<title>Re:Trends</title>
	<author>A beautiful mind</author>
	<datestamp>1262964360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>No, <a href="http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/index.html" title="potaroo.net">this sums</a> [potaroo.net] it up. If you'd bother to read this or an estimation done by someone else, then you'd know that the uncertainty is less than 3 months with high confidence. Of course the 625 days thing is bullshit, but saying 1.5 years +-3 months is probably what will happen, unless something really major changes don't start happening in the IPv4 process, which I wouldn't say is too likely based on the fact that it would require immediate global cooperation (see how well that went in Copenhagen).</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , this sums [ potaroo.net ] it up .
If you 'd bother to read this or an estimation done by someone else , then you 'd know that the uncertainty is less than 3 months with high confidence .
Of course the 625 days thing is bullshit , but saying 1.5 years + -3 months is probably what will happen , unless something really major changes do n't start happening in the IPv4 process , which I would n't say is too likely based on the fact that it would require immediate global cooperation ( see how well that went in Copenhagen ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, this sums [potaroo.net] it up.
If you'd bother to read this or an estimation done by someone else, then you'd know that the uncertainty is less than 3 months with high confidence.
Of course the 625 days thing is bullshit, but saying 1.5 years +-3 months is probably what will happen, unless something really major changes don't start happening in the IPv4 process, which I wouldn't say is too likely based on the fact that it would require immediate global cooperation (see how well that went in Copenhagen).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693746</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693862</id>
	<title>I genuinely wish they would just give it all away.</title>
	<author>kieran</author>
	<datestamp>1262963580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We'll never be able to justify the cost of implementing IPv6 properly until it becomes something customers are demanding, and that won't happen until there is stuff on the Internet people want that to reach couldn't get hold of an IPv4 address.</p><p>Still, I suppose I just have to be patient.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 'll never be able to justify the cost of implementing IPv6 properly until it becomes something customers are demanding , and that wo n't happen until there is stuff on the Internet people want that to reach could n't get hold of an IPv4 address.Still , I suppose I just have to be patient .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We'll never be able to justify the cost of implementing IPv6 properly until it becomes something customers are demanding, and that won't happen until there is stuff on the Internet people want that to reach couldn't get hold of an IPv4 address.Still, I suppose I just have to be patient.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30720954</id>
	<title>$ host -t aaaa slashdot.org</title>
	<author>Eunuchswear</author>
	<datestamp>1263204180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <tt>$ host -t aaaa slashdot.org<br>slashdot.org has no AAAA record</tt></p></div> </blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>$ host -t aaaa slashdot.orgslashdot.org has no AAAA record</tokentext>
<sentencetext> $ host -t aaaa slashdot.orgslashdot.org has no AAAA record 
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694052</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>fbjon</author>
	<datestamp>1262964720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You mean NAT solves more problems than it causes? I don't buy that for a second.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You mean NAT solves more problems than it causes ?
I do n't buy that for a second .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You mean NAT solves more problems than it causes?
I don't buy that for a second.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694102</id>
	<title>Nortel's class A?</title>
	<author>Fractal Dice</author>
	<datestamp>1262964960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Doesn't Nortel have an entire class A network (47.x.x.x) to itself?  Having that returned to the pool after the death roll is complete should presumably buy a little time?</p><p>(I guess that falls into the <i>"On the other hand, ARIN is also having some success in reclaiming unused IPv4 address space back from organizations that aren't using all of their addresses."</i> line from the article?)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does n't Nortel have an entire class A network ( 47.x.x.x ) to itself ?
Having that returned to the pool after the death roll is complete should presumably buy a little time ?
( I guess that falls into the " On the other hand , ARIN is also having some success in reclaiming unused IPv4 address space back from organizations that are n't using all of their addresses .
" line from the article ?
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doesn't Nortel have an entire class A network (47.x.x.x) to itself?
Having that returned to the pool after the death roll is complete should presumably buy a little time?
(I guess that falls into the "On the other hand, ARIN is also having some success in reclaiming unused IPv4 address space back from organizations that aren't using all of their addresses.
" line from the article?
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694646</id>
	<title>Re:Panic Averted - Resume Doing Nothing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262967240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So this is that big change that the Mayans forecast for 2012....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So this is that big change that the Mayans forecast for 2012... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So this is that big change that the Mayans forecast for 2012....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694006</id>
	<title>Re:Could last another 10 years...</title>
	<author>fbjon</author>
	<datestamp>1262964480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I found my college campus computer lab has all of their workstations on the live Internet.</p></div><p>Congratulations for describing exactly how the Internet should be. It's also not a security nightmare at all, it's SOP.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I found my college campus computer lab has all of their workstations on the live Internet.Congratulations for describing exactly how the Internet should be .
It 's also not a security nightmare at all , it 's SOP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I found my college campus computer lab has all of their workstations on the live Internet.Congratulations for describing exactly how the Internet should be.
It's also not a security nightmare at all, it's SOP.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30695782</id>
	<title>Re:Could last another 10 years...</title>
	<author>Pinky's Brain</author>
	<datestamp>1262971140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They can't sell em, at best they can go into the ISP business with them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They ca n't sell em , at best they can go into the ISP business with them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They can't sell em, at best they can go into the ISP business with them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693974</id>
	<title>Re:Could last another 10 years...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262964300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Having live IP addresses is the way it <b>should</b> be done. NAT offers no more security than a simple firewall in this case.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Having live IP addresses is the way it should be done .
NAT offers no more security than a simple firewall in this case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having live IP addresses is the way it should be done.
NAT offers no more security than a simple firewall in this case.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696576</id>
	<title>Dragging it out...</title>
	<author>Bert64</author>
	<datestamp>1262974200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sure the registries will drag things out, pulling back some blocks, making it harder and more expensive to get new allocations etc, and putting pressure on organizations to cut down their IP usage.</p><p>In the meantime, there is still very little support for IPv6 out there...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure the registries will drag things out , pulling back some blocks , making it harder and more expensive to get new allocations etc , and putting pressure on organizations to cut down their IP usage.In the meantime , there is still very little support for IPv6 out there.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure the registries will drag things out, pulling back some blocks, making it harder and more expensive to get new allocations etc, and putting pressure on organizations to cut down their IP usage.In the meantime, there is still very little support for IPv6 out there...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693894</id>
	<title>Guess we'll just going to have to have...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262963760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>...another financial crisis. Because that's the reason there was a slump in allocation rates. The current best projection for IANA pool exhaustion is <a href="http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/index.html" title="potaroo.net">Sep/Oct 2011</a> [potaroo.net]. Without the financial crisis that would have been end of 2010. The IANA guys would have been dead on, if not for a once in a 100 years financial event.<br> <br>
The tone of the submission is really silly. There wasn't 4.3B allocatable addresses in the first place. Out of the 256 "/8s" only 219.914<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/8 is theoretically usable, even before subtracting the legacy allocations. The summary makes it sound like it was a doom-and-gloom prediction that didn't happen to be true, but that's not the case.<br> <br>
Also, it's "not the next 2 or 3 years", based on the available number of addresses 1.5 years for the IANA pool and 2,5 years are hard bars until RIRs (regional internet registries) run out.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...another financial crisis .
Because that 's the reason there was a slump in allocation rates .
The current best projection for IANA pool exhaustion is Sep/Oct 2011 [ potaroo.net ] .
Without the financial crisis that would have been end of 2010 .
The IANA guys would have been dead on , if not for a once in a 100 years financial event .
The tone of the submission is really silly .
There was n't 4.3B allocatable addresses in the first place .
Out of the 256 " /8s " only 219.914 /8 is theoretically usable , even before subtracting the legacy allocations .
The summary makes it sound like it was a doom-and-gloom prediction that did n't happen to be true , but that 's not the case .
Also , it 's " not the next 2 or 3 years " , based on the available number of addresses 1.5 years for the IANA pool and 2,5 years are hard bars until RIRs ( regional internet registries ) run out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...another financial crisis.
Because that's the reason there was a slump in allocation rates.
The current best projection for IANA pool exhaustion is Sep/Oct 2011 [potaroo.net].
Without the financial crisis that would have been end of 2010.
The IANA guys would have been dead on, if not for a once in a 100 years financial event.
The tone of the submission is really silly.
There wasn't 4.3B allocatable addresses in the first place.
Out of the 256 "/8s" only 219.914 /8 is theoretically usable, even before subtracting the legacy allocations.
The summary makes it sound like it was a doom-and-gloom prediction that didn't happen to be true, but that's not the case.
Also, it's "not the next 2 or 3 years", based on the available number of addresses 1.5 years for the IANA pool and 2,5 years are hard bars until RIRs (regional internet registries) run out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696350</id>
	<title>Waste waste waste...</title>
	<author>SuperCharlie</author>
	<datestamp>1262973300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think we could probably go a lot longer if places like the University where I used to work didn't just hand out "real" IP's on their DHCP for a full Class C. I cringed every time I thought about the security issues of having a "real" IP for every PC on campus. Who also wouldn't allow firewalls, even Windows firewall, because it would impede their port scans.. sigh.. but I digress..</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think we could probably go a lot longer if places like the University where I used to work did n't just hand out " real " IP 's on their DHCP for a full Class C. I cringed every time I thought about the security issues of having a " real " IP for every PC on campus .
Who also would n't allow firewalls , even Windows firewall , because it would impede their port scans.. sigh.. but I digress. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think we could probably go a lot longer if places like the University where I used to work didn't just hand out "real" IP's on their DHCP for a full Class C. I cringed every time I thought about the security issues of having a "real" IP for every PC on campus.
Who also wouldn't allow firewalls, even Windows firewall, because it would impede their port scans.. sigh.. but I digress..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696542</id>
	<title>Re:Trends</title>
	<author>Bigjeff5</author>
	<datestamp>1262974080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You realize that based on the rate of consumption a couple of years ago we were supposed to run out of addresses by 2010.</p><p>Now based on the current rate of consumption we are supposed to run out of addresses some time in 2012.</p><p>I think it's safe to say you can't accurately predict how soon we'll run out of address by basing it on the current rate of consumption, because it is fairly obvious that the rate of consumption changes as we approach the end.</p><p>I estimate that within 10 years but not sooner than 5 we will run out of IPv4 addresses, and within 20 years we will have switched to IPv6.</p><p>$50 says my estimate is more accurate - if less precise - than TFA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You realize that based on the rate of consumption a couple of years ago we were supposed to run out of addresses by 2010.Now based on the current rate of consumption we are supposed to run out of addresses some time in 2012.I think it 's safe to say you ca n't accurately predict how soon we 'll run out of address by basing it on the current rate of consumption , because it is fairly obvious that the rate of consumption changes as we approach the end.I estimate that within 10 years but not sooner than 5 we will run out of IPv4 addresses , and within 20 years we will have switched to IPv6. $ 50 says my estimate is more accurate - if less precise - than TFA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You realize that based on the rate of consumption a couple of years ago we were supposed to run out of addresses by 2010.Now based on the current rate of consumption we are supposed to run out of addresses some time in 2012.I think it's safe to say you can't accurately predict how soon we'll run out of address by basing it on the current rate of consumption, because it is fairly obvious that the rate of consumption changes as we approach the end.I estimate that within 10 years but not sooner than 5 we will run out of IPv4 addresses, and within 20 years we will have switched to IPv6.$50 says my estimate is more accurate - if less precise - than TFA.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693870</id>
	<title>Deja Vu?</title>
	<author>rgfranks</author>
	<datestamp>1262963580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hasn't this story appeared previously (over and over again)?  It sounds like peak oil.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Has n't this story appeared previously ( over and over again ) ?
It sounds like peak oil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hasn't this story appeared previously (over and over again)?
It sounds like peak oil.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696196</id>
	<title>Re:Nortel's class A?</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1262972640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You make a good point.</p><p>ARIN in theory has the authority to revoke or simply not renew IP space that isn't being used properly.  They are leased, not sold.</p><p>Whether they can survive the political shitstorm that would ensue as a result is another thing.</p><p>I'm sure that "national security" will be thrown around against ARIN over v4 shortages just like it was against the EFF when they whined about ACTA being kept under wraps.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You make a good point.ARIN in theory has the authority to revoke or simply not renew IP space that is n't being used properly .
They are leased , not sold.Whether they can survive the political shitstorm that would ensue as a result is another thing.I 'm sure that " national security " will be thrown around against ARIN over v4 shortages just like it was against the EFF when they whined about ACTA being kept under wraps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You make a good point.ARIN in theory has the authority to revoke or simply not renew IP space that isn't being used properly.
They are leased, not sold.Whether they can survive the political shitstorm that would ensue as a result is another thing.I'm sure that "national security" will be thrown around against ARIN over v4 shortages just like it was against the EFF when they whined about ACTA being kept under wraps.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694102</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694474</id>
	<title>Yet another RGA from CmdrTaco</title>
	<author>FlyingGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1262966400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pfffft!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pfffft !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pfffft!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694298</id>
	<title>Re:Trends</title>
	<author>idiotnot</author>
	<datestamp>1262965740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, I prefer the mouseover on <a href="http://xkcd.com/195/" title="xkcd.com" rel="nofollow">this one</a> [xkcd.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , I prefer the mouseover on this one [ xkcd.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, I prefer the mouseover on this one [xkcd.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693746</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694586</id>
	<title>So what's the satus...</title>
	<author>HaZardman27</author>
	<datestamp>1262967060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...of deploying IPv6?  Two years isn't <i>that</i> much time, and I haven't heard much of when IPv6 will be the new standard.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...of deploying IPv6 ?
Two years is n't that much time , and I have n't heard much of when IPv6 will be the new standard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...of deploying IPv6?
Two years isn't that much time, and I haven't heard much of when IPv6 will be the new standard.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30705348</id>
	<title>Every time someone posts an IPv4 article...</title>
	<author>Xaduurv</author>
	<datestamp>1263067380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Every time someone posts an IPv4 article, God kills a kitten.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Every time someone posts an IPv4 article , God kills a kitten .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every time someone posts an IPv4 article, God kills a kitten.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694028</id>
	<title>Re:What about the domain parking, tasting, sniping</title>
	<author>Bigbutt</author>
	<datestamp>1262964600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have 12 domains on one IP. Not to say that the different squatters aren't using a bunch though.</p><p>Better would be to pull back IPs from the folks who don't need them.</p><p>What about that block that the Ham Radio guys had out in San Francisco that was hijacked by the spammers? Or the companies and governments that have thousands of unused IPs? I used to work at one government place (contractor) and we had a large chunk for our site with about 2,000 employees.</p><p>Where I work, we have 1,200 people in the company and we use four NAT'd IP addresses. Since I have to add them to my server to allow admin access to my tools, I know which ones I use.</p><p>[John]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have 12 domains on one IP .
Not to say that the different squatters are n't using a bunch though.Better would be to pull back IPs from the folks who do n't need them.What about that block that the Ham Radio guys had out in San Francisco that was hijacked by the spammers ?
Or the companies and governments that have thousands of unused IPs ?
I used to work at one government place ( contractor ) and we had a large chunk for our site with about 2,000 employees.Where I work , we have 1,200 people in the company and we use four NAT 'd IP addresses .
Since I have to add them to my server to allow admin access to my tools , I know which ones I use .
[ John ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have 12 domains on one IP.
Not to say that the different squatters aren't using a bunch though.Better would be to pull back IPs from the folks who don't need them.What about that block that the Ham Radio guys had out in San Francisco that was hijacked by the spammers?
Or the companies and governments that have thousands of unused IPs?
I used to work at one government place (contractor) and we had a large chunk for our site with about 2,000 employees.Where I work, we have 1,200 people in the company and we use four NAT'd IP addresses.
Since I have to add them to my server to allow admin access to my tools, I know which ones I use.
[John]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694228</id>
	<title>2012?</title>
	<author>Xacid</author>
	<datestamp>1262965560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe THIS is the end of the world everyone's talking about...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe THIS is the end of the world everyone 's talking about.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe THIS is the end of the world everyone's talking about...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696626</id>
	<title>Re:Could last another 10 years...</title>
	<author>u38cg</author>
	<datestamp>1262974380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unfortunately, IP allocations are not tradeable - if you try selling them off you will get a short, sharp ass-reaming from the relevant authorities, because they are (rightly or wrongly) culturally against them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately , IP allocations are not tradeable - if you try selling them off you will get a short , sharp ass-reaming from the relevant authorities , because they are ( rightly or wrongly ) culturally against them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately, IP allocations are not tradeable - if you try selling them off you will get a short, sharp ass-reaming from the relevant authorities, because they are (rightly or wrongly) culturally against them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694172</id>
	<title>Re:Could last another 10 years...</title>
	<author>jcurran</author>
	<datestamp>1262965320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We have been working on getting those with unneeded legacy blocks to return them, and have had some success:  <a href="http://blog.icann.org/2008/02/recovering-ipv4-address-space/" title="icann.org" rel="nofollow">http://blog.icann.org/2008/02/recovering-ipv4-address-space/</a> [icann.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>We have been working on getting those with unneeded legacy blocks to return them , and have had some success : http : //blog.icann.org/2008/02/recovering-ipv4-address-space/ [ icann.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We have been working on getting those with unneeded legacy blocks to return them, and have had some success:  http://blog.icann.org/2008/02/recovering-ipv4-address-space/ [icann.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30699078</id>
	<title>Take a read on security issues in IPv6</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262941320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's a list of some key security flaws to look out for. The first four are all related to the IP type 0 routing header feature:</p><p>1. Trespassing</p><p>IPv6's advanced network discovery lets you select the path for your packets, but it could also let an attacker go where he or she should not go. "You can have them reach places they should not reach, and interact with equipment not in direct sight," according to Biondi and Ebalard. And an attacker could drill down and get more information on your remote networks, too.</p><p>2. Filtering device bypass</p><p>Many currently-installed filtering devices, such as firewalls, were not designed for IPv6. DMZ protection for IPv6 traffic varies in many products, as does firewall filtering of IPv6 packets. Experts worry that with such devices in place, an attacker could hide traffic or a payload using Route Header 0.</p><p>3. Denial-of-service (DOS)</p><p>DOS attacks can occur when IPv6 packets are sent back and forth through the same link until they overwhelm bandwidth. And you know what can happen after that -- not just the service disruption itself, but other attacks that are masked by the DOS.</p><p>"According to Philippe, you can mark a single packet such that it'll go around and around and around in these huge routing loops, such that a single packet will be able to consume far more link bandwidth than it could have previously," says Dan Kaminsky, director of penetration testing services for IOActive. "An 88x bandwidth amplifier is actually a fairly big deal, and will allow someone with a 1.5Mbit link to kill a 100Mbit upstream. That would be pretty bad."</p><p>4. Anycast: Not safe anymore</p><p>"Anycast works by announcing the same IP at many places on Internet so that each box can go to the nearest one," explains Biondi and Ebalard.</p><p>Trouble is, IPv6's routing header 0 feature "can single out all instances of an anycast service," according to the French researchers, and basically negate the benefits of anycasting.</p><p>The researchers concluded that IPv6's type 0 routing headers "have no applications, and only bring security issues." The only way to protect yourself for now is to disallow "RH0" in your network, and to prevent your host systems from processing it as well, they said.</p><p>5. IPv6 puts IPv4 at risk</p><p>There are bigger-picture problems than routing headers. Once you enable IPv6, you may open up your IPv4 network and devices to its vulnerabilities as well. This is a hot button for service providers testing out IPv6, but the problem applies to enterprises with large WANs also, says Nicholas Fischbach, senior manager of network engineering/security for COLT Telecom Group plc (Nasdaq: COLT; London: CTM.L).</p><p>"Turn on IPv6, and a number of DOS conditions may put your revenue- generating [IPv4] backbone at risk," Fischbach says.</p><p>And IPv6 isn't just a network issue, either. "It will also impact security devices, operating systems, and applications," he says. "Making an application IPv6-ready requires changes, some minor, some major, depending on the application and how it's written. But at the end of the day, it could mean another exposure of a security hole that no one thought of, or [had] only fixed in the IPv4 part."</p><p>
&nbsp; Kelly Jackson Higgins, Senior Editor, Dark Reading</p><p>From <a href="http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:aDqU\_9rcWCMJ:www.darkreading.com/security/perimeter/showArticle.jhtml\%3FarticleID\%3D208804503+\%22IPv6\%22+and+\%22security\%22&amp;cd=6&amp;hl=en&amp;ct=clnk&amp;gl=us" title="74.125.93.132" rel="nofollow">http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:aDqU\_9rcWCMJ:www.darkreading.com/security/perimeter/showArticle.jhtml\%3FarticleID\%3D208804503+\%22IPv6\%22+and+\%22security\%22&amp;cd=6&amp;hl=en&amp;ct=clnk&amp;gl=us</a> [74.125.93.132]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's a list of some key security flaws to look out for .
The first four are all related to the IP type 0 routing header feature : 1 .
TrespassingIPv6 's advanced network discovery lets you select the path for your packets , but it could also let an attacker go where he or she should not go .
" You can have them reach places they should not reach , and interact with equipment not in direct sight , " according to Biondi and Ebalard .
And an attacker could drill down and get more information on your remote networks , too.2 .
Filtering device bypassMany currently-installed filtering devices , such as firewalls , were not designed for IPv6 .
DMZ protection for IPv6 traffic varies in many products , as does firewall filtering of IPv6 packets .
Experts worry that with such devices in place , an attacker could hide traffic or a payload using Route Header 0.3 .
Denial-of-service ( DOS ) DOS attacks can occur when IPv6 packets are sent back and forth through the same link until they overwhelm bandwidth .
And you know what can happen after that -- not just the service disruption itself , but other attacks that are masked by the DOS .
" According to Philippe , you can mark a single packet such that it 'll go around and around and around in these huge routing loops , such that a single packet will be able to consume far more link bandwidth than it could have previously , " says Dan Kaminsky , director of penetration testing services for IOActive .
" An 88x bandwidth amplifier is actually a fairly big deal , and will allow someone with a 1.5Mbit link to kill a 100Mbit upstream .
That would be pretty bad. " 4 .
Anycast : Not safe anymore " Anycast works by announcing the same IP at many places on Internet so that each box can go to the nearest one , " explains Biondi and Ebalard.Trouble is , IPv6 's routing header 0 feature " can single out all instances of an anycast service , " according to the French researchers , and basically negate the benefits of anycasting.The researchers concluded that IPv6 's type 0 routing headers " have no applications , and only bring security issues .
" The only way to protect yourself for now is to disallow " RH0 " in your network , and to prevent your host systems from processing it as well , they said.5 .
IPv6 puts IPv4 at riskThere are bigger-picture problems than routing headers .
Once you enable IPv6 , you may open up your IPv4 network and devices to its vulnerabilities as well .
This is a hot button for service providers testing out IPv6 , but the problem applies to enterprises with large WANs also , says Nicholas Fischbach , senior manager of network engineering/security for COLT Telecom Group plc ( Nasdaq : COLT ; London : CTM.L ) .
" Turn on IPv6 , and a number of DOS conditions may put your revenue- generating [ IPv4 ] backbone at risk , " Fischbach says.And IPv6 is n't just a network issue , either .
" It will also impact security devices , operating systems , and applications , " he says .
" Making an application IPv6-ready requires changes , some minor , some major , depending on the application and how it 's written .
But at the end of the day , it could mean another exposure of a security hole that no one thought of , or [ had ] only fixed in the IPv4 part .
"   Kelly Jackson Higgins , Senior Editor , Dark ReadingFrom http : //74.125.93.132/search ? q = cache : aDqU \ _9rcWCMJ : www.darkreading.com/security/perimeter/showArticle.jhtml \ % 3FarticleID \ % 3D208804503 + \ % 22IPv6 \ % 22 + and + \ % 22security \ % 22&amp;cd = 6&amp;hl = en&amp;ct = clnk&amp;gl = us [ 74.125.93.132 ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's a list of some key security flaws to look out for.
The first four are all related to the IP type 0 routing header feature:1.
TrespassingIPv6's advanced network discovery lets you select the path for your packets, but it could also let an attacker go where he or she should not go.
"You can have them reach places they should not reach, and interact with equipment not in direct sight," according to Biondi and Ebalard.
And an attacker could drill down and get more information on your remote networks, too.2.
Filtering device bypassMany currently-installed filtering devices, such as firewalls, were not designed for IPv6.
DMZ protection for IPv6 traffic varies in many products, as does firewall filtering of IPv6 packets.
Experts worry that with such devices in place, an attacker could hide traffic or a payload using Route Header 0.3.
Denial-of-service (DOS)DOS attacks can occur when IPv6 packets are sent back and forth through the same link until they overwhelm bandwidth.
And you know what can happen after that -- not just the service disruption itself, but other attacks that are masked by the DOS.
"According to Philippe, you can mark a single packet such that it'll go around and around and around in these huge routing loops, such that a single packet will be able to consume far more link bandwidth than it could have previously," says Dan Kaminsky, director of penetration testing services for IOActive.
"An 88x bandwidth amplifier is actually a fairly big deal, and will allow someone with a 1.5Mbit link to kill a 100Mbit upstream.
That would be pretty bad."4.
Anycast: Not safe anymore"Anycast works by announcing the same IP at many places on Internet so that each box can go to the nearest one," explains Biondi and Ebalard.Trouble is, IPv6's routing header 0 feature "can single out all instances of an anycast service," according to the French researchers, and basically negate the benefits of anycasting.The researchers concluded that IPv6's type 0 routing headers "have no applications, and only bring security issues.
" The only way to protect yourself for now is to disallow "RH0" in your network, and to prevent your host systems from processing it as well, they said.5.
IPv6 puts IPv4 at riskThere are bigger-picture problems than routing headers.
Once you enable IPv6, you may open up your IPv4 network and devices to its vulnerabilities as well.
This is a hot button for service providers testing out IPv6, but the problem applies to enterprises with large WANs also, says Nicholas Fischbach, senior manager of network engineering/security for COLT Telecom Group plc (Nasdaq: COLT; London: CTM.L).
"Turn on IPv6, and a number of DOS conditions may put your revenue- generating [IPv4] backbone at risk," Fischbach says.And IPv6 isn't just a network issue, either.
"It will also impact security devices, operating systems, and applications," he says.
"Making an application IPv6-ready requires changes, some minor, some major, depending on the application and how it's written.
But at the end of the day, it could mean another exposure of a security hole that no one thought of, or [had] only fixed in the IPv4 part.
"
  Kelly Jackson Higgins, Senior Editor, Dark ReadingFrom http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:aDqU\_9rcWCMJ:www.darkreading.com/security/perimeter/showArticle.jhtml\%3FarticleID\%3D208804503+\%22IPv6\%22+and+\%22security\%22&amp;cd=6&amp;hl=en&amp;ct=clnk&amp;gl=us [74.125.93.132]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694186</id>
	<title>In other news....</title>
	<author>idiotnot</author>
	<datestamp>1262965380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IPX won't die in 2010, either.</p><p>But, in all seriousness, there's a few things to remember here.<br>1.  The v4 address space <i> <b>will</b></i>  be exhausted in the foreseeable future.<br>2.  Reclaiming large blocks only delays that inevitability by a few months.<br>3.  With a few exceptions, modern, supported OSes (Windows [2003, 2008, Vista, 7], GNU/Linux, all of the BSDs, OS X) support IPv6 perfectly.<br>4.  Most of the critical applications support IPv6 perfectly.<br>5.  The big holdup on the consumer side has been with the ISPs.  The DOCSIS 3.0 roll-out is ongoing in many places.<br>6.  The US government has mandated it.  The compliance date was in 2008 for all of the Federal agencies on their backbones.  It's just a matter now of getting ISP access to those sites, and configuring lower-level systems.</p><p>The luddite attitude here about this is amazing.  If you're really all that concerned about it, and don't want to focus too much on the nuts-and-bolts, here's some advice:  Learn BIND.  Setting up your resolvers properly will spare you headaches.</p><p>I use IPv6 every day.  I get lots of e-mail over IPv6 (netbsd and freebsd mailing lists, to name just a couple).  I enjoy being able to ssh to all of my machines at home directly.  It's here.  Evaluate your crap, and see what's not going to work.  Plan to replace that stuff.  Most of it probably will need replacing by the time you get assigned a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/64 or<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/48 by your ISP, anyway.  This isn't rocket science.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/rant</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IPX wo n't die in 2010 , either.But , in all seriousness , there 's a few things to remember here.1 .
The v4 address space will be exhausted in the foreseeable future.2 .
Reclaiming large blocks only delays that inevitability by a few months.3 .
With a few exceptions , modern , supported OSes ( Windows [ 2003 , 2008 , Vista , 7 ] , GNU/Linux , all of the BSDs , OS X ) support IPv6 perfectly.4 .
Most of the critical applications support IPv6 perfectly.5 .
The big holdup on the consumer side has been with the ISPs .
The DOCSIS 3.0 roll-out is ongoing in many places.6 .
The US government has mandated it .
The compliance date was in 2008 for all of the Federal agencies on their backbones .
It 's just a matter now of getting ISP access to those sites , and configuring lower-level systems.The luddite attitude here about this is amazing .
If you 're really all that concerned about it , and do n't want to focus too much on the nuts-and-bolts , here 's some advice : Learn BIND .
Setting up your resolvers properly will spare you headaches.I use IPv6 every day .
I get lots of e-mail over IPv6 ( netbsd and freebsd mailing lists , to name just a couple ) .
I enjoy being able to ssh to all of my machines at home directly .
It 's here .
Evaluate your crap , and see what 's not going to work .
Plan to replace that stuff .
Most of it probably will need replacing by the time you get assigned a /64 or /48 by your ISP , anyway .
This is n't rocket science .
/rant</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IPX won't die in 2010, either.But, in all seriousness, there's a few things to remember here.1.
The v4 address space  will  be exhausted in the foreseeable future.2.
Reclaiming large blocks only delays that inevitability by a few months.3.
With a few exceptions, modern, supported OSes (Windows [2003, 2008, Vista, 7], GNU/Linux, all of the BSDs, OS X) support IPv6 perfectly.4.
Most of the critical applications support IPv6 perfectly.5.
The big holdup on the consumer side has been with the ISPs.
The DOCSIS 3.0 roll-out is ongoing in many places.6.
The US government has mandated it.
The compliance date was in 2008 for all of the Federal agencies on their backbones.
It's just a matter now of getting ISP access to those sites, and configuring lower-level systems.The luddite attitude here about this is amazing.
If you're really all that concerned about it, and don't want to focus too much on the nuts-and-bolts, here's some advice:  Learn BIND.
Setting up your resolvers properly will spare you headaches.I use IPv6 every day.
I get lots of e-mail over IPv6 (netbsd and freebsd mailing lists, to name just a couple).
I enjoy being able to ssh to all of my machines at home directly.
It's here.
Evaluate your crap, and see what's not going to work.
Plan to replace that stuff.
Most of it probably will need replacing by the time you get assigned a /64 or /48 by your ISP, anyway.
This isn't rocket science.
/rant</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694176</id>
	<title>Re:Panic Averted - Resume Doing Nothing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262965320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well the dearth of IPv4 addresses has been predicted for almost as long as the year of the Linux desktop. Neither has happened.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well the dearth of IPv4 addresses has been predicted for almost as long as the year of the Linux desktop .
Neither has happened .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well the dearth of IPv4 addresses has been predicted for almost as long as the year of the Linux desktop.
Neither has happened.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693648</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693808</id>
	<title>Re:What about the domain parking, tasting, sniping</title>
	<author>me at werk</author>
	<datestamp>1262963280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thanks to Apache and the miracle of Virtual Servers, one can use one IPv4 address to host thousands of domains!  This depends on HTTP1.1, though, and old browsers can't handle it, but nobody cares about them.</p><p>See: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain\_name#Use\_in\_web\_site\_hosting" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain\_name#Use\_in\_web\_site\_hosting</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>In conclusion, your argument is invalid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thanks to Apache and the miracle of Virtual Servers , one can use one IPv4 address to host thousands of domains !
This depends on HTTP1.1 , though , and old browsers ca n't handle it , but nobody cares about them.See : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain \ _name # Use \ _in \ _web \ _site \ _hosting [ wikipedia.org ] In conclusion , your argument is invalid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thanks to Apache and the miracle of Virtual Servers, one can use one IPv4 address to host thousands of domains!
This depends on HTTP1.1, though, and old browsers can't handle it, but nobody cares about them.See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain\_name#Use\_in\_web\_site\_hosting [wikipedia.org]In conclusion, your argument is invalid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30695964</id>
	<title>Re:Panic Averted - Resume Doing Nothing</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1262971800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To get v6 internet, you need cooperation all the way up to the tier 1 providers.  If even one of them isn't playing ball, the chain breaks.</p><p>The first thing that needs to happen for v6 to prosper is for v4 to suffer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To get v6 internet , you need cooperation all the way up to the tier 1 providers .
If even one of them is n't playing ball , the chain breaks.The first thing that needs to happen for v6 to prosper is for v4 to suffer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To get v6 internet, you need cooperation all the way up to the tier 1 providers.
If even one of them isn't playing ball, the chain breaks.The first thing that needs to happen for v6 to prosper is for v4 to suffer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694764</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30695560</id>
	<title>Re:Trends</title>
	<author>FireFury03</author>
	<datestamp>1262970420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>No, this sums [potaroo.net] it up. If you'd bother to read this or an estimation done by someone else, then you'd know that the uncertainty is less than 3 months with high confidence.</p></div><p>"<a href="http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2009-05/ipv4model.html" title="potaroo.net">Given the skewed nature of the distribution of allocations it is difficult to be any more precise than this and although the mathematical model may claim today that exhaustion will occur at 10:32 am on the 14th of June 2011, the range of uncertainty in such a prediction spans years rather than seconds.</a> [potaroo.net]"</p><p>One thing is certain though - we \_will\_ run out of IPv4 addresses soon.  It doesn't much matter how soon at this point - it's soon enough that people should be seriously thinking about implementing IPv6 networks.  And anyone writing network software would be very foolish to not have already implemented and tested IPv6 support at this point.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No , this sums [ potaroo.net ] it up .
If you 'd bother to read this or an estimation done by someone else , then you 'd know that the uncertainty is less than 3 months with high confidence .
" Given the skewed nature of the distribution of allocations it is difficult to be any more precise than this and although the mathematical model may claim today that exhaustion will occur at 10 : 32 am on the 14th of June 2011 , the range of uncertainty in such a prediction spans years rather than seconds .
[ potaroo.net ] " One thing is certain though - we \ _will \ _ run out of IPv4 addresses soon .
It does n't much matter how soon at this point - it 's soon enough that people should be seriously thinking about implementing IPv6 networks .
And anyone writing network software would be very foolish to not have already implemented and tested IPv6 support at this point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, this sums [potaroo.net] it up.
If you'd bother to read this or an estimation done by someone else, then you'd know that the uncertainty is less than 3 months with high confidence.
"Given the skewed nature of the distribution of allocations it is difficult to be any more precise than this and although the mathematical model may claim today that exhaustion will occur at 10:32 am on the 14th of June 2011, the range of uncertainty in such a prediction spans years rather than seconds.
[potaroo.net]"One thing is certain though - we \_will\_ run out of IPv4 addresses soon.
It doesn't much matter how soon at this point - it's soon enough that people should be seriously thinking about implementing IPv6 networks.
And anyone writing network software would be very foolish to not have already implemented and tested IPv6 support at this point.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30704096</id>
	<title>Re:The adaptation of IPv6 will free IPv4 addresses</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262967840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How is that?  I thought that clients with only a v6 address could only interact with a v6 server or peer.  There is no v4v6 protocol conversion in the design of v6.  There are ways to tunnel v6 over v4 intermediate nodes, but "dual stack" on both the client and the server is the order of the day for a long time to come.  Until the last v4-only server is powered down, all (most) clients will need a v4 address.   And what a mess the current IPv6 DFZ is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How is that ?
I thought that clients with only a v6 address could only interact with a v6 server or peer .
There is no v4v6 protocol conversion in the design of v6 .
There are ways to tunnel v6 over v4 intermediate nodes , but " dual stack " on both the client and the server is the order of the day for a long time to come .
Until the last v4-only server is powered down , all ( most ) clients will need a v4 address .
And what a mess the current IPv6 DFZ is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How is that?
I thought that clients with only a v6 address could only interact with a v6 server or peer.
There is no v4v6 protocol conversion in the design of v6.
There are ways to tunnel v6 over v4 intermediate nodes, but "dual stack" on both the client and the server is the order of the day for a long time to come.
Until the last v4-only server is powered down, all (most) clients will need a v4 address.
And what a mess the current IPv6 DFZ is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694016</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697712</id>
	<title>Re:I genuinely wish they would just give it all aw</title>
	<author>austin987</author>
	<datestamp>1262978760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>and that won't happen until there is stuff on the Internet people want that to reach couldn't get hold of an IPv4 address.</p><p>You mean like <a href="http://freeipv6porn.com/" title="freeipv6porn.com" rel="nofollow">http://freeipv6porn.com/</a> [freeipv6porn.com] ?</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>and that wo n't happen until there is stuff on the Internet people want that to reach could n't get hold of an IPv4 address.You mean like http : //freeipv6porn.com/ [ freeipv6porn.com ] ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and that won't happen until there is stuff on the Internet people want that to reach couldn't get hold of an IPv4 address.You mean like http://freeipv6porn.com/ [freeipv6porn.com] ?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693602</id>
	<title>IPv4 doesn't die</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262962200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IPv4 doesn't die - it just runs out of available addresses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IPv4 does n't die - it just runs out of available addresses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IPv4 doesn't die - it just runs out of available addresses.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694964</id>
	<title>Re:Panic Averted - Resume Doing Nothing</title>
	<author>fulldecent</author>
	<datestamp>1262968320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It goes hand in hand with our doing nothing about global warming policy (the hope being once that kicks in it'll reduce the populace and free up some IPs). Stay the course.</p></div><p>You have accurately compared responses to IPv4 and global warming: listen to underlings rabble about pseudoscience, find out that no problem exists, move on to next problem.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It goes hand in hand with our doing nothing about global warming policy ( the hope being once that kicks in it 'll reduce the populace and free up some IPs ) .
Stay the course.You have accurately compared responses to IPv4 and global warming : listen to underlings rabble about pseudoscience , find out that no problem exists , move on to next problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It goes hand in hand with our doing nothing about global warming policy (the hope being once that kicks in it'll reduce the populace and free up some IPs).
Stay the course.You have accurately compared responses to IPv4 and global warming: listen to underlings rabble about pseudoscience, find out that no problem exists, move on to next problem.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693934</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693774</id>
	<title>Re:What about the domain parking, tasting, sniping</title>
	<author>hoggoth</author>
	<datestamp>1262963100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>99\% of those are on servers sharing a single IP address. It's been about 15 years since each web site needed it's own IP address.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>99 \ % of those are on servers sharing a single IP address .
It 's been about 15 years since each web site needed it 's own IP address .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>99\% of those are on servers sharing a single IP address.
It's been about 15 years since each web site needed it's own IP address.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693712</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693602
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694186
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694052
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693978
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693602
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693796
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696150
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693894
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697700
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694186
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694010
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30695964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693974
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693828
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694172
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693828
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30695560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693984
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693746
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694266
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693746
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693866
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30699078
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694520
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694176
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697906
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696054
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693828
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693828
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694094
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693602
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30695782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694068
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693828
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694646
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694702
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693840
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694754
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693746
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694068
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693828
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694110
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693808
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693764
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697434
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30704096
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694016
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693984
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693746
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697064
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694186
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694110
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30695750
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693894
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_08_1339229_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693746
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_08_1339229.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30698974
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_08_1339229.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693648
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694764
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30695964
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694646
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694176
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696220
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693788
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696206
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693934
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694964
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_08_1339229.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693840
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694662
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697560
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_08_1339229.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697172
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_08_1339229.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693828
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694172
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696054
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694068
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30695782
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696626
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694006
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693974
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_08_1339229.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694020
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_08_1339229.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693862
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697814
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697906
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697434
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_08_1339229.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693746
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693984
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30695560
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696542
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694298
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694754
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694266
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_08_1339229.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694186
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697064
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697700
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_08_1339229.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696196
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_08_1339229.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693890
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_08_1339229.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693880
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694374
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694052
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694702
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696122
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694110
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30697278
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696656
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_08_1339229.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693694
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_08_1339229.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693602
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694094
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693978
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693946
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_08_1339229.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30695592
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_08_1339229.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693894
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696150
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30695750
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_08_1339229.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693866
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694608
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_08_1339229.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694282
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30696390
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_08_1339229.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694520
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30699078
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_08_1339229.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694016
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30704096
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_08_1339229.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693878
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_08_1339229.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693808
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694028
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30694010
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693796
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693774
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693772
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693764
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_08_1339229.30693832
</commentlist>
</conversation>
