<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_24_2139250</id>
	<title>IPv4 Free Pool Drops Below 10\%, 1.0.0.0/8 Allocated</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1264330980000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>mysidia writes <i>"A total of <a href="http://seclists.org/nanog/2010/Jan/776">16,777,216 IP address numbers were just allocated</a> to the Asian Pacific Network Information Centre IP address registry for assignment to users. Some venerable IP addresses such as <em>1.1.1.1</em> and <em>1.2.3.4</em> have been officially assigned to the registry itself temporarily, for testing as part of the DEBOGON project. The major address blocks 1.0.0.0/8 and 27.0.0.0/8, are chosen accordance with a <a href="http://blog.icann.org/2009/09/selecting-which-8-to-allocate-to-an-rir/">decision</a> by ICANN to assign the least-desirable remaining IP address ranges to the largest regional registries first,  reserving most more desirable blocks of addresses for the African and Latin American internet users,  instead of  North America, Europe, or Asia. In other words: of the 256 major networks in IPv4, only 24 network blocks remain unallocated in the global free pool, and many of the remaining networks have been tainted or made less desirable by unofficial users who attempted an end-run around the registration process, and  treated 'RESERVED' IP addresses as 'freely available' for their own internal use. This allocation is right on target with projected IPv4 consumption and was predicted by the <a href="http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/index.html">IPv4 report</a>, which has continuously and reliably estimated global pool IP address exhaustion for <em>late 2011</em> and regional registry exhaustion by <em>late 2012</em>. So, does your enterprise intranet use any unofficial address ranges for private networks?"</i> Reader dude\_nl sends in a <a href="http://bgpmon.net/blog/?p=275">summary of the issues with allocating from 1.0.0.0/8</a> from the BGPmon.net blog. "As Alain Durand mentioned on Nanog: 'Who said the water at the bottom of the barrel of IPv4 addresses will be very pure? We ARE running out and the global pain is increasing.'"</htmltext>
<tokenext>mysidia writes " A total of 16,777,216 IP address numbers were just allocated to the Asian Pacific Network Information Centre IP address registry for assignment to users .
Some venerable IP addresses such as 1.1.1.1 and 1.2.3.4 have been officially assigned to the registry itself temporarily , for testing as part of the DEBOGON project .
The major address blocks 1.0.0.0/8 and 27.0.0.0/8 , are chosen accordance with a decision by ICANN to assign the least-desirable remaining IP address ranges to the largest regional registries first , reserving most more desirable blocks of addresses for the African and Latin American internet users , instead of North America , Europe , or Asia .
In other words : of the 256 major networks in IPv4 , only 24 network blocks remain unallocated in the global free pool , and many of the remaining networks have been tainted or made less desirable by unofficial users who attempted an end-run around the registration process , and treated 'RESERVED ' IP addresses as 'freely available ' for their own internal use .
This allocation is right on target with projected IPv4 consumption and was predicted by the IPv4 report , which has continuously and reliably estimated global pool IP address exhaustion for late 2011 and regional registry exhaustion by late 2012 .
So , does your enterprise intranet use any unofficial address ranges for private networks ?
" Reader dude \ _nl sends in a summary of the issues with allocating from 1.0.0.0/8 from the BGPmon.net blog .
" As Alain Durand mentioned on Nanog : 'Who said the water at the bottom of the barrel of IPv4 addresses will be very pure ?
We ARE running out and the global pain is increasing .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>mysidia writes "A total of 16,777,216 IP address numbers were just allocated to the Asian Pacific Network Information Centre IP address registry for assignment to users.
Some venerable IP addresses such as 1.1.1.1 and 1.2.3.4 have been officially assigned to the registry itself temporarily, for testing as part of the DEBOGON project.
The major address blocks 1.0.0.0/8 and 27.0.0.0/8, are chosen accordance with a decision by ICANN to assign the least-desirable remaining IP address ranges to the largest regional registries first,  reserving most more desirable blocks of addresses for the African and Latin American internet users,  instead of  North America, Europe, or Asia.
In other words: of the 256 major networks in IPv4, only 24 network blocks remain unallocated in the global free pool, and many of the remaining networks have been tainted or made less desirable by unofficial users who attempted an end-run around the registration process, and  treated 'RESERVED' IP addresses as 'freely available' for their own internal use.
This allocation is right on target with projected IPv4 consumption and was predicted by the IPv4 report, which has continuously and reliably estimated global pool IP address exhaustion for late 2011 and regional registry exhaustion by late 2012.
So, does your enterprise intranet use any unofficial address ranges for private networks?
" Reader dude\_nl sends in a summary of the issues with allocating from 1.0.0.0/8 from the BGPmon.net blog.
"As Alain Durand mentioned on Nanog: 'Who said the water at the bottom of the barrel of IPv4 addresses will be very pure?
We ARE running out and the global pain is increasing.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30893536</id>
	<title>Re:they should start selling IPadresses like phone</title>
	<author>loxosceles</author>
	<datestamp>1264447800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>01d2:9:0247::</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>01d2 : 9 : 0247 : :</tokentext>
<sentencetext>01d2:9:0247::</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883524</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885776</id>
	<title>Re:Dual stack is NOT the solution.</title>
	<author>hedwards</author>
	<datestamp>1264352400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dual stack isn't the solution per se, but the equivalent did work well for the digital conversion last year. It meant that for a time both systems could be running as the testing was being done and that people could buy the new equipment and use it until the analog systems were finally shutdown for good.<br> <br>

In this case, I'd think that it should work in a similar fashion, as OSes continue forward, they'll being offering just IPv6, not IPv4 because once most of the web is IPv6 it would be stupid to keep updating code which nobody uses. A decent set of tools and defaulting to using it rather than something else and most of those fools will be onboard. Otherwise, who really cares what set up an organization uses on the inside of their fire wall? Doing a 1:1 translation between IPv6 and IPv4 class C addresses is pretty similar to just using IPv6 if done properly.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dual stack is n't the solution per se , but the equivalent did work well for the digital conversion last year .
It meant that for a time both systems could be running as the testing was being done and that people could buy the new equipment and use it until the analog systems were finally shutdown for good .
In this case , I 'd think that it should work in a similar fashion , as OSes continue forward , they 'll being offering just IPv6 , not IPv4 because once most of the web is IPv6 it would be stupid to keep updating code which nobody uses .
A decent set of tools and defaulting to using it rather than something else and most of those fools will be onboard .
Otherwise , who really cares what set up an organization uses on the inside of their fire wall ?
Doing a 1 : 1 translation between IPv6 and IPv4 class C addresses is pretty similar to just using IPv6 if done properly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dual stack isn't the solution per se, but the equivalent did work well for the digital conversion last year.
It meant that for a time both systems could be running as the testing was being done and that people could buy the new equipment and use it until the analog systems were finally shutdown for good.
In this case, I'd think that it should work in a similar fashion, as OSes continue forward, they'll being offering just IPv6, not IPv4 because once most of the web is IPv6 it would be stupid to keep updating code which nobody uses.
A decent set of tools and defaulting to using it rather than something else and most of those fools will be onboard.
Otherwise, who really cares what set up an organization uses on the inside of their fire wall?
Doing a 1:1 translation between IPv6 and IPv4 class C addresses is pretty similar to just using IPv6 if done properly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887926</id>
	<title>maya calender overrated</title>
	<author>alobar72</author>
	<datestamp>1264419240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>well I think this whole Maya Calender issue is highly overrated.
Everbody is wondering about this 2012 date.
But I say: If the Maya had realy been that prophetic - for them, a calender that ends in the 16th century would have sufficed .</htmltext>
<tokenext>well I think this whole Maya Calender issue is highly overrated .
Everbody is wondering about this 2012 date .
But I say : If the Maya had realy been that prophetic - for them , a calender that ends in the 16th century would have sufficed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>well I think this whole Maya Calender issue is highly overrated.
Everbody is wondering about this 2012 date.
But I say: If the Maya had realy been that prophetic - for them, a calender that ends in the 16th century would have sufficed .</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885526</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885116</id>
	<title>Re:IPv6?</title>
	<author>Chris Mattern</author>
	<datestamp>1264347120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IPv6 works like this.  Every ISP and backbone peer has looked at the massive investment necessary to make their entire installed plant IPv6 ready, the large amount of work required, the fact that they will probably break everything about five times in the process because they did something wrong, and has decided that they will migrate when someone holds a gun to their heads and absolutely forces them.  Not before.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IPv6 works like this .
Every ISP and backbone peer has looked at the massive investment necessary to make their entire installed plant IPv6 ready , the large amount of work required , the fact that they will probably break everything about five times in the process because they did something wrong , and has decided that they will migrate when someone holds a gun to their heads and absolutely forces them .
Not before .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IPv6 works like this.
Every ISP and backbone peer has looked at the massive investment necessary to make their entire installed plant IPv6 ready, the large amount of work required, the fact that they will probably break everything about five times in the process because they did something wrong, and has decided that they will migrate when someone holds a gun to their heads and absolutely forces them.
Not before.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884066</id>
	<title>Re:Hewlett-Packard</title>
	<author>Wesley Felter</author>
	<datestamp>1264339680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The company currently known as Hewlett-Packard also includes the remains of Compaq, DEC, Tandem, etc. Renumbering is expensive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The company currently known as Hewlett-Packard also includes the remains of Compaq , DEC , Tandem , etc .
Renumbering is expensive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The company currently known as Hewlett-Packard also includes the remains of Compaq, DEC, Tandem, etc.
Renumbering is expensive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883680</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884156</id>
	<title>Re:Hewlett-Packard</title>
	<author>MichaelSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1264340400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>HP acquired IP ranges from DEC and Compaq.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>HP acquired IP ranges from DEC and Compaq .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HP acquired IP ranges from DEC and Compaq.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883680</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883898</id>
	<title>Re:Oh well...</title>
	<author>klapaucjusz</author>
	<datestamp>1264338540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Hearing they got allocated [to non-English speaking countries] is really good news, since I rarely go to [foreign] websites.</p></div><p>Until you try to visit an American website that is hosted by an Asian ISP (because it's cheaper that way).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hearing they got allocated [ to non-English speaking countries ] is really good news , since I rarely go to [ foreign ] websites.Until you try to visit an American website that is hosted by an Asian ISP ( because it 's cheaper that way ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hearing they got allocated [to non-English speaking countries] is really good news, since I rarely go to [foreign] websites.Until you try to visit an American website that is hosted by an Asian ISP (because it's cheaper that way).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30892660</id>
	<title>I blame the RIRs</title>
	<author>jon3k</author>
	<datestamp>1264443900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I had a tier1 carrier tell me their private IP MPLS network is using public addresses because of a software limitation of their label routers.  This was after I asked why it wasn't privately addressed, then they said well some customers could have conflicting address space, which I then pointed out VRF and finally he got an engineer on the phone who said flat out it was a software limitation at the time of implementation.  We're talking about hundreds of thousands of addresses here. <br> <br>
We have a few dozen internet T1s used for backup connectivity and every one of them came with a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/24 of public address space.  Did we ask for it?  No.  I tried to give it back, they don't want it. <br> <br>
The problem here is the RIRs aren't doing their job in policing the address space.  They get all starry-eyed when some big telco shows up and asks for a massive block of address space and just hand it over.  The amount of wasted address space is SICKENING.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I had a tier1 carrier tell me their private IP MPLS network is using public addresses because of a software limitation of their label routers .
This was after I asked why it was n't privately addressed , then they said well some customers could have conflicting address space , which I then pointed out VRF and finally he got an engineer on the phone who said flat out it was a software limitation at the time of implementation .
We 're talking about hundreds of thousands of addresses here .
We have a few dozen internet T1s used for backup connectivity and every one of them came with a /24 of public address space .
Did we ask for it ?
No. I tried to give it back , they do n't want it .
The problem here is the RIRs are n't doing their job in policing the address space .
They get all starry-eyed when some big telco shows up and asks for a massive block of address space and just hand it over .
The amount of wasted address space is SICKENING .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had a tier1 carrier tell me their private IP MPLS network is using public addresses because of a software limitation of their label routers.
This was after I asked why it wasn't privately addressed, then they said well some customers could have conflicting address space, which I then pointed out VRF and finally he got an engineer on the phone who said flat out it was a software limitation at the time of implementation.
We're talking about hundreds of thousands of addresses here.
We have a few dozen internet T1s used for backup connectivity and every one of them came with a /24 of public address space.
Did we ask for it?
No.  I tried to give it back, they don't want it.
The problem here is the RIRs aren't doing their job in policing the address space.
They get all starry-eyed when some big telco shows up and asks for a massive block of address space and just hand it over.
The amount of wasted address space is SICKENING.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884948</id>
	<title>Re:Is this a misprint...</title>
	<author>JohnKelly84</author>
	<datestamp>1264345980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and <b>Numbers</b> does control IANA.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers does control IANA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers does control IANA.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884210</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885694</id>
	<title>It may be time...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264351920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>for an IPv4 dead pool!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>for an IPv4 dead pool !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>for an IPv4 dead pool!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885126</id>
	<title>Re:they should start selling IPadresses like phone</title>
	<author>trapnest</author>
	<datestamp>1264347180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think the leading zero in the second octet is valid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think the leading zero in the second octet is valid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think the leading zero in the second octet is valid.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883342</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887510</id>
	<title>Re:IPv6?</title>
	<author>slack\_justyb</author>
	<datestamp>1264413840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>IPv4 is terribly simple and does its job. IP, mask, gateway.</p></div><p>
That's exactly how IPv6 works as well, it also comes with a slew of other options for auto-configuring your network (sort of like APIPA but better).  There is also DHCP if you like that.  Seriously, there are way too many people putting way too much thought into something as simple as IPv6.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>IPv4 is terribly simple and does its job .
IP , mask , gateway .
That 's exactly how IPv6 works as well , it also comes with a slew of other options for auto-configuring your network ( sort of like APIPA but better ) .
There is also DHCP if you like that .
Seriously , there are way too many people putting way too much thought into something as simple as IPv6 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IPv4 is terribly simple and does its job.
IP, mask, gateway.
That's exactly how IPv6 works as well, it also comes with a slew of other options for auto-configuring your network (sort of like APIPA but better).
There is also DHCP if you like that.
Seriously, there are way too many people putting way too much thought into something as simple as IPv6.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884616</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883428</id>
	<title>Why should we care about idiots?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264335780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, what? Some idiots have abused reserved or otherwise unused netblocks for their internal networks. I honestly couldn't care less. I have seen this  before, even with other blocks which were already in use. It is a very bad practice. Unfortunately there is only one way people might stop doing this: Allocate the blocks now. If users won't be able to reach certain sites, the admin might change the internal addresses. Or they might not. Who cares? No, really: Who cares?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , what ?
Some idiots have abused reserved or otherwise unused netblocks for their internal networks .
I honestly could n't care less .
I have seen this before , even with other blocks which were already in use .
It is a very bad practice .
Unfortunately there is only one way people might stop doing this : Allocate the blocks now .
If users wo n't be able to reach certain sites , the admin might change the internal addresses .
Or they might not .
Who cares ?
No , really : Who cares ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, what?
Some idiots have abused reserved or otherwise unused netblocks for their internal networks.
I honestly couldn't care less.
I have seen this  before, even with other blocks which were already in use.
It is a very bad practice.
Unfortunately there is only one way people might stop doing this: Allocate the blocks now.
If users won't be able to reach certain sites, the admin might change the internal addresses.
Or they might not.
Who cares?
No, really: Who cares?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885656</id>
	<title>Re:IPv6?</title>
	<author>ekhben</author>
	<datestamp>1264351560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>... IPv4 machines should simply be a.b.c.d.0.0.0.0.0.0 or something equally obvious...</p></div></blockquote><p>::ffff:1.2.3.4.  Not that it helps, since v6 and v4 stacks are different.

</p><p>IPv6 is still network portion, host portion.  You could still specify things in mask notation, if you wanted to, but it's kind of silly.  Just use network prefix length notation, it's nicer for both v4 and v6.  Gateways are still usually on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>::1.</p><blockquote><div><p>Routers and IP stacks could be written to extend the address space a few more bits</p></div></blockquote><p>Ah yes, the "use more v4 bits" idea that comes up every time.  Let's look at what you'd need to do to extend IPv4 addresses by one bit.  First, you need somewhere to store the bit.  You could use a reserved bit, or you could make a new IP option.  Either way you've hit your first roadblock: no existing IPv4 equipment or software will be expecting this, so you need to replace everything with IPv4.1 equipment -- that, or randomly your packets won't go to the right destination, they'll go to the 0-bit destination instead.  Oops.

</p><p>You wave a magic wand and solve that problem (which is the same problem as the IPv6 support problem).  Now you turn to DNS.  Oops, an A record only contains 32 bits.  You'll need some way for a DNS resolver to report the extra bit back, but you can't break compatibility with existing resolvers, so you will probably wind up defining a new record, let's call it the AA record.  Now you can map names to IPv4.1 addresses -- but you need to roll out DNS software everywhere to support it.  Oops.

</p><p>Another magic wand later, you come to the application layer.  It turns out that a bunch of software has a bunch of struct sockaddr\_in variables that it uses to connect to services and to figure out who connected back in turn.  You'll need some way to deal with that.  Maybe you could define a new structure, sockaddr\_in4\_1 or something, that has the extra bit of information.  Oh, but shit, now you need to rewrite all your application software to be aware of that new structure.

</p><p>Then you try to figure out DHCP, PPP, reverse DNS, ICMP, BGP, spanning-tree, accounting systems, DOCSIS, and every other IP network protocol known to man, because every single one of them is built on the basis that there's only 32 bits in a network address.

</p><p>And eventually, it turns out that the people who came up with IPv6 didn't all somehow miss the blindingly obvious solution, because there is no blindingly obvious solution.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... IPv4 machines should simply be a.b.c.d.0.0.0.0.0.0 or something equally obvious... : : ffff : 1.2.3.4 .
Not that it helps , since v6 and v4 stacks are different .
IPv6 is still network portion , host portion .
You could still specify things in mask notation , if you wanted to , but it 's kind of silly .
Just use network prefix length notation , it 's nicer for both v4 and v6 .
Gateways are still usually on : : 1.Routers and IP stacks could be written to extend the address space a few more bitsAh yes , the " use more v4 bits " idea that comes up every time .
Let 's look at what you 'd need to do to extend IPv4 addresses by one bit .
First , you need somewhere to store the bit .
You could use a reserved bit , or you could make a new IP option .
Either way you 've hit your first roadblock : no existing IPv4 equipment or software will be expecting this , so you need to replace everything with IPv4.1 equipment -- that , or randomly your packets wo n't go to the right destination , they 'll go to the 0-bit destination instead .
Oops . You wave a magic wand and solve that problem ( which is the same problem as the IPv6 support problem ) .
Now you turn to DNS .
Oops , an A record only contains 32 bits .
You 'll need some way for a DNS resolver to report the extra bit back , but you ca n't break compatibility with existing resolvers , so you will probably wind up defining a new record , let 's call it the AA record .
Now you can map names to IPv4.1 addresses -- but you need to roll out DNS software everywhere to support it .
Oops . Another magic wand later , you come to the application layer .
It turns out that a bunch of software has a bunch of struct sockaddr \ _in variables that it uses to connect to services and to figure out who connected back in turn .
You 'll need some way to deal with that .
Maybe you could define a new structure , sockaddr \ _in4 \ _1 or something , that has the extra bit of information .
Oh , but shit , now you need to rewrite all your application software to be aware of that new structure .
Then you try to figure out DHCP , PPP , reverse DNS , ICMP , BGP , spanning-tree , accounting systems , DOCSIS , and every other IP network protocol known to man , because every single one of them is built on the basis that there 's only 32 bits in a network address .
And eventually , it turns out that the people who came up with IPv6 did n't all somehow miss the blindingly obvious solution , because there is no blindingly obvious solution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... IPv4 machines should simply be a.b.c.d.0.0.0.0.0.0 or something equally obvious...::ffff:1.2.3.4.
Not that it helps, since v6 and v4 stacks are different.
IPv6 is still network portion, host portion.
You could still specify things in mask notation, if you wanted to, but it's kind of silly.
Just use network prefix length notation, it's nicer for both v4 and v6.
Gateways are still usually on ::1.Routers and IP stacks could be written to extend the address space a few more bitsAh yes, the "use more v4 bits" idea that comes up every time.
Let's look at what you'd need to do to extend IPv4 addresses by one bit.
First, you need somewhere to store the bit.
You could use a reserved bit, or you could make a new IP option.
Either way you've hit your first roadblock: no existing IPv4 equipment or software will be expecting this, so you need to replace everything with IPv4.1 equipment -- that, or randomly your packets won't go to the right destination, they'll go to the 0-bit destination instead.
Oops.

You wave a magic wand and solve that problem (which is the same problem as the IPv6 support problem).
Now you turn to DNS.
Oops, an A record only contains 32 bits.
You'll need some way for a DNS resolver to report the extra bit back, but you can't break compatibility with existing resolvers, so you will probably wind up defining a new record, let's call it the AA record.
Now you can map names to IPv4.1 addresses -- but you need to roll out DNS software everywhere to support it.
Oops.

Another magic wand later, you come to the application layer.
It turns out that a bunch of software has a bunch of struct sockaddr\_in variables that it uses to connect to services and to figure out who connected back in turn.
You'll need some way to deal with that.
Maybe you could define a new structure, sockaddr\_in4\_1 or something, that has the extra bit of information.
Oh, but shit, now you need to rewrite all your application software to be aware of that new structure.
Then you try to figure out DHCP, PPP, reverse DNS, ICMP, BGP, spanning-tree, accounting systems, DOCSIS, and every other IP network protocol known to man, because every single one of them is built on the basis that there's only 32 bits in a network address.
And eventually, it turns out that the people who came up with IPv6 didn't all somehow miss the blindingly obvious solution, because there is no blindingly obvious solution.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884616</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884414</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunately, applications still behind the cu</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1264342320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If it makes you feel better, I recently found out that the Homegroup feature in Windows 7 *requires* IPv6 to function. Reassuring on one level, on another level (the one that has me replacing my venerable wifi router) it's a complete pain in the ass.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If it makes you feel better , I recently found out that the Homegroup feature in Windows 7 * requires * IPv6 to function .
Reassuring on one level , on another level ( the one that has me replacing my venerable wifi router ) it 's a complete pain in the ass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it makes you feel better, I recently found out that the Homegroup feature in Windows 7 *requires* IPv6 to function.
Reassuring on one level, on another level (the one that has me replacing my venerable wifi router) it's a complete pain in the ass.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883424</id>
	<title>Re:What about getting back some...</title>
	<author>Trolan</author>
	<datestamp>1264335780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And for each of those<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/8s, you buy maybe 1.5-2 months more time until v4 exhaustion.  Most of those<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/8s were also allocated prior to any policies permitting reclamation.  Any recovery of them would involve legal wrangling, which would be expensive and time consuming.  Prolonging the end result isn't a viable solution to the problem, when the solution is available now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And for each of those /8s , you buy maybe 1.5-2 months more time until v4 exhaustion .
Most of those /8s were also allocated prior to any policies permitting reclamation .
Any recovery of them would involve legal wrangling , which would be expensive and time consuming .
Prolonging the end result is n't a viable solution to the problem , when the solution is available now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And for each of those /8s, you buy maybe 1.5-2 months more time until v4 exhaustion.
Most of those /8s were also allocated prior to any policies permitting reclamation.
Any recovery of them would involve legal wrangling, which would be expensive and time consuming.
Prolonging the end result isn't a viable solution to the problem, when the solution is available now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883366</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883970</id>
	<title>The end is near</title>
	<author>()ff-t()pic</author>
	<datestamp>1264339020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We are going to run out of IPv4 addresses in March next year (422 days from today)<br><a href="http://ipv4depletion.com/?page\_id=4" title="ipv4depletion.com" rel="nofollow">http://ipv4depletion.com/?page\_id=4</a> [ipv4depletion.com]<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/JB</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We are going to run out of IPv4 addresses in March next year ( 422 days from today ) http : //ipv4depletion.com/ ? page \ _id = 4 [ ipv4depletion.com ] /JB</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We are going to run out of IPv4 addresses in March next year (422 days from today)http://ipv4depletion.com/?page\_id=4 [ipv4depletion.com] /JB</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885428</id>
	<title>6 months</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264349940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I got in to tech 10 years ago, IPV6 was 6 months away from implementation, AFAIK it still is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I got in to tech 10 years ago , IPV6 was 6 months away from implementation , AFAIK it still is ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I got in to tech 10 years ago, IPV6 was 6 months away from implementation, AFAIK it still is ;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883438</id>
	<title>Re:What about getting back some...</title>
	<author>compro01</author>
	<datestamp>1264335840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And after all the kicking, screaming, hair-pulling, knock-down drag-out legal battles to reclaim those blocks, you buy a grand total of about 18 months.</p><p>It's not worth it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And after all the kicking , screaming , hair-pulling , knock-down drag-out legal battles to reclaim those blocks , you buy a grand total of about 18 months.It 's not worth it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And after all the kicking, screaming, hair-pulling, knock-down drag-out legal battles to reclaim those blocks, you buy a grand total of about 18 months.It's not worth it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883366</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886008</id>
	<title>Re:AnoNet</title>
	<author>Afforess</author>
	<datestamp>1264354800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>You'll know IPV4 really ran out of space once they sell of 127.0.0.1 though...</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 'll know IPV4 really ran out of space once they sell of 127.0.0.1 though.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You'll know IPV4 really ran out of space once they sell of 127.0.0.1 though...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884428</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883276</id>
	<title>Ill bet this will happen</title>
	<author>jhoegl</author>
	<datestamp>1264334820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>What will happen will be the standard that us humans have followed throughout the ages.<br> <br>
We will wait until the IPv4 addresses run out and then force businesses to start using IPv6 if they want to get on the internet.<br>
There will be a temporary boon for networking manufacturers as companies will have to change their equipment<br>
As a side curiosity, I wonder how many public IPv4 IPs are actually in use.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What will happen will be the standard that us humans have followed throughout the ages .
We will wait until the IPv4 addresses run out and then force businesses to start using IPv6 if they want to get on the internet .
There will be a temporary boon for networking manufacturers as companies will have to change their equipment As a side curiosity , I wonder how many public IPv4 IPs are actually in use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What will happen will be the standard that us humans have followed throughout the ages.
We will wait until the IPv4 addresses run out and then force businesses to start using IPv6 if they want to get on the internet.
There will be a temporary boon for networking manufacturers as companies will have to change their equipment
As a side curiosity, I wonder how many public IPv4 IPs are actually in use.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883924</id>
	<title>Princess</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264338720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Princess Cruises uses 1.1.1.1 to logoff their (expensive) ship wifi networks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Princess Cruises uses 1.1.1.1 to logoff their ( expensive ) ship wifi networks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Princess Cruises uses 1.1.1.1 to logoff their (expensive) ship wifi networks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884128</id>
	<title>Re:they should start selling IPadresses like phone</title>
	<author>izomiac</author>
	<datestamp>1264340040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Personally I'd like 73.150.2.210, though it looks a bit nicer in base 10.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Personally I 'd like 73.150.2.210 , though it looks a bit nicer in base 10 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personally I'd like 73.150.2.210, though it looks a bit nicer in base 10.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883342</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883342</id>
	<title>they should start selling IPadresses like phone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264335240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>numbers and car plates.</p><p>I'd love to have 1.1.1.1, or 29.09.19.69 (my bday)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>numbers and car plates.I 'd love to have 1.1.1.1 , or 29.09.19.69 ( my bday )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>numbers and car plates.I'd love to have 1.1.1.1, or 29.09.19.69 (my bday)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886652</id>
	<title>Re:Ill bet this will happen</title>
	<author>dasmoo</author>
	<datestamp>1264361100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>IPv6 for most end users will mean nothing. End users don't know how to fix mail when it breaks, and as such, won't use it (or will use it until it breaks). The IETF built v6 with the idea of the end to end internet because they want that, not because it's popular.</htmltext>
<tokenext>IPv6 for most end users will mean nothing .
End users do n't know how to fix mail when it breaks , and as such , wo n't use it ( or will use it until it breaks ) .
The IETF built v6 with the idea of the end to end internet because they want that , not because it 's popular .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IPv6 for most end users will mean nothing.
End users don't know how to fix mail when it breaks, and as such, won't use it (or will use it until it breaks).
The IETF built v6 with the idea of the end to end internet because they want that, not because it's popular.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30892814</id>
	<title>Close, but no cigar.</title>
	<author>professorguy</author>
	<datestamp>1264444620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>On the other side, the shear number of IPv6 addresses means that every network connected device can have it's own unique IP address hard coded at the factory, specific for the region where it is to be sold.</p></div><p>That's called a MAC address and it cannot substitute for an IP address.  How's the factory going to know what logical structure the servers are going to inhabit?  Your scheme eliminates the ability to do cut-through routing--that's a big hit in performance especially when there's 128 bits to read.
<br> <br>
Time to bone up on the differences between physical and logical addresses.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>On the other side , the shear number of IPv6 addresses means that every network connected device can have it 's own unique IP address hard coded at the factory , specific for the region where it is to be sold.That 's called a MAC address and it can not substitute for an IP address .
How 's the factory going to know what logical structure the servers are going to inhabit ?
Your scheme eliminates the ability to do cut-through routing--that 's a big hit in performance especially when there 's 128 bits to read .
Time to bone up on the differences between physical and logical addresses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the other side, the shear number of IPv6 addresses means that every network connected device can have it's own unique IP address hard coded at the factory, specific for the region where it is to be sold.That's called a MAC address and it cannot substitute for an IP address.
How's the factory going to know what logical structure the servers are going to inhabit?
Your scheme eliminates the ability to do cut-through routing--that's a big hit in performance especially when there's 128 bits to read.
Time to bone up on the differences between physical and logical addresses.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884010</id>
	<title>Re:they should start selling IPadresses like phone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264339320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good job now I know your bday.</p><p>- h4x0r</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good job now I know your bday.- h4x0r</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good job now I know your bday.- h4x0r</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883342</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30889862</id>
	<title>Re:Ill bet this will happen</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1264434360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I'm surprised we 're not having a new Y2K-esque freak-out over this already.</i></p><p>Probably because of all the idiots who now think that Y2K was some big hoax, because "nothing happened". The sad thing is that, if we run into trouble with IPv4, these people will be first in line moaning about the experts not being able to fix things in time...</p><p><i>(heck, more effort was put into the digital TV switch than seems to be going into IPv6 switch).</i></p><p>That's a good point. But I suppose that Governments are able to make money from it, by selling off those parts of the spectrum. Moreover, most of the effort is simply in the form of educating people to buy a new box.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm surprised we 're not having a new Y2K-esque freak-out over this already.Probably because of all the idiots who now think that Y2K was some big hoax , because " nothing happened " .
The sad thing is that , if we run into trouble with IPv4 , these people will be first in line moaning about the experts not being able to fix things in time... ( heck , more effort was put into the digital TV switch than seems to be going into IPv6 switch ) .That 's a good point .
But I suppose that Governments are able to make money from it , by selling off those parts of the spectrum .
Moreover , most of the effort is simply in the form of educating people to buy a new box .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm surprised we 're not having a new Y2K-esque freak-out over this already.Probably because of all the idiots who now think that Y2K was some big hoax, because "nothing happened".
The sad thing is that, if we run into trouble with IPv4, these people will be first in line moaning about the experts not being able to fix things in time...(heck, more effort was put into the digital TV switch than seems to be going into IPv6 switch).That's a good point.
But I suppose that Governments are able to make money from it, by selling off those parts of the spectrum.
Moreover, most of the effort is simply in the form of educating people to buy a new box.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883788</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883366</id>
	<title>What about getting back some...</title>
	<author>mrboyd</author>
	<datestamp>1264335360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I seriously doubt that GE, IBM, AT&amp;T, Xerox, HP, Apple, MIT, Ford, AT&amp;T (again), Halliburton, Bell, Prudential securities, UK government  Department for work and Pensions, Dupont de Nemours and Co., Inc, Merck, USPS and some others deserve or need a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/8.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I seriously doubt that GE , IBM , AT&amp;T , Xerox , HP , Apple , MIT , Ford , AT&amp;T ( again ) , Halliburton , Bell , Prudential securities , UK government Department for work and Pensions , Dupont de Nemours and Co. , Inc , Merck , USPS and some others deserve or need a /8 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I seriously doubt that GE, IBM, AT&amp;T, Xerox, HP, Apple, MIT, Ford, AT&amp;T (again), Halliburton, Bell, Prudential securities, UK government  Department for work and Pensions, Dupont de Nemours and Co., Inc, Merck, USPS and some others deserve or need a /8.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884616</id>
	<title>Re:IPv6?</title>
	<author>PsychoSlashDot</author>
	<datestamp>1264343880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Want me to adopt IPv6?  Make IPv6 Lite.</p><p>In my humble opinion, the problem with IPv6 is that it's too radical a methodology change for most IT folks to be interested in.  I wouldn't be surprised at all if a huge number of us are silently, subconsciously "waiting it out", for someone to propose and ratify a less intimidating address-extension protocol.</p><p>It's not that I can't handle Hex... it's not that I can't handle colons.  It's not that I can't handle learning about tunnels, or brokers, or 6to4 or any of the other immense pile of knowledge surrounding IPv6.  It's that I don't WANT to.  IPv4 is terribly simple and does its job.  IP, mask, gateway.  By and large that encompasses just about everything you really need to know about IPv4 as a network admin.  Sure, it's tough to have huge routing tables, but that's life.  Hardware keeps getting faster and memory cheaper.  Deal with it.</p><p>Yeah, okay, IPv6 can't - by definition - be the same since it's got to overlay things.  But really, if this standard was to have "caught on", it should have changed as little as possible at once.  IPv4 machines should simply be a.b.c.d.0.0.0.0.0.0 or something equally obvious.  Routers and IP stacks could be written to extend the address space a few more bits, and the same methods as used in IPv4 should have been used to denote subnets.  It SHOULD have been a simple task of padding out IPv4 space into IPv6, and software that doesn't grok the full address space just couldn't use it.  Imagine adding two more "numbers" to your telephone, so phone "numbers" could include Pi and e.  Call me at 1-800-555-5e55.  If your phone doesn't have the buttons, you can't dial it.  Fine.  But the backbone should have been smoothly extended.</p><p>That's what IPv6 SHOULD have done.  Add more address space and nothing else.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Want me to adopt IPv6 ?
Make IPv6 Lite.In my humble opinion , the problem with IPv6 is that it 's too radical a methodology change for most IT folks to be interested in .
I would n't be surprised at all if a huge number of us are silently , subconsciously " waiting it out " , for someone to propose and ratify a less intimidating address-extension protocol.It 's not that I ca n't handle Hex... it 's not that I ca n't handle colons .
It 's not that I ca n't handle learning about tunnels , or brokers , or 6to4 or any of the other immense pile of knowledge surrounding IPv6 .
It 's that I do n't WANT to .
IPv4 is terribly simple and does its job .
IP , mask , gateway .
By and large that encompasses just about everything you really need to know about IPv4 as a network admin .
Sure , it 's tough to have huge routing tables , but that 's life .
Hardware keeps getting faster and memory cheaper .
Deal with it.Yeah , okay , IPv6 ca n't - by definition - be the same since it 's got to overlay things .
But really , if this standard was to have " caught on " , it should have changed as little as possible at once .
IPv4 machines should simply be a.b.c.d.0.0.0.0.0.0 or something equally obvious .
Routers and IP stacks could be written to extend the address space a few more bits , and the same methods as used in IPv4 should have been used to denote subnets .
It SHOULD have been a simple task of padding out IPv4 space into IPv6 , and software that does n't grok the full address space just could n't use it .
Imagine adding two more " numbers " to your telephone , so phone " numbers " could include Pi and e. Call me at 1-800-555-5e55 .
If your phone does n't have the buttons , you ca n't dial it .
Fine. But the backbone should have been smoothly extended.That 's what IPv6 SHOULD have done .
Add more address space and nothing else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Want me to adopt IPv6?
Make IPv6 Lite.In my humble opinion, the problem with IPv6 is that it's too radical a methodology change for most IT folks to be interested in.
I wouldn't be surprised at all if a huge number of us are silently, subconsciously "waiting it out", for someone to propose and ratify a less intimidating address-extension protocol.It's not that I can't handle Hex... it's not that I can't handle colons.
It's not that I can't handle learning about tunnels, or brokers, or 6to4 or any of the other immense pile of knowledge surrounding IPv6.
It's that I don't WANT to.
IPv4 is terribly simple and does its job.
IP, mask, gateway.
By and large that encompasses just about everything you really need to know about IPv4 as a network admin.
Sure, it's tough to have huge routing tables, but that's life.
Hardware keeps getting faster and memory cheaper.
Deal with it.Yeah, okay, IPv6 can't - by definition - be the same since it's got to overlay things.
But really, if this standard was to have "caught on", it should have changed as little as possible at once.
IPv4 machines should simply be a.b.c.d.0.0.0.0.0.0 or something equally obvious.
Routers and IP stacks could be written to extend the address space a few more bits, and the same methods as used in IPv4 should have been used to denote subnets.
It SHOULD have been a simple task of padding out IPv4 space into IPv6, and software that doesn't grok the full address space just couldn't use it.
Imagine adding two more "numbers" to your telephone, so phone "numbers" could include Pi and e.  Call me at 1-800-555-5e55.
If your phone doesn't have the buttons, you can't dial it.
Fine.  But the backbone should have been smoothly extended.That's what IPv6 SHOULD have done.
Add more address space and nothing else.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885768</id>
	<title>Re:AnoNet</title>
	<author>Arbition</author>
	<datestamp>1264352400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm with Optus (Australian) and when I use mobile internet, everything (HTTP) seems to be intercepted and sent through 2.1.1.x addresses (One use is for image recompression, which sucks). So here we have two sins by the second largest Australian Telecoms network.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm with Optus ( Australian ) and when I use mobile internet , everything ( HTTP ) seems to be intercepted and sent through 2.1.1.x addresses ( One use is for image recompression , which sucks ) .
So here we have two sins by the second largest Australian Telecoms network .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm with Optus (Australian) and when I use mobile internet, everything (HTTP) seems to be intercepted and sent through 2.1.1.x addresses (One use is for image recompression, which sucks).
So here we have two sins by the second largest Australian Telecoms network.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883244</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883680</id>
	<title>Hewlett-Packard</title>
	<author>QuietLagoon</author>
	<datestamp>1264337160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why does Hewlett-Packard have not one but TWO<nobr> <wbr></nobr><a href="http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/" title="iana.org">/8 IPv4 address ranges</a> [iana.org]?  Ain't they heard of NAT?  How many other corporations have legacy<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/8 addresses and are holding on to them, not because they need them but because their laziness to move towards efficient use of those addresses creates a sense of entitlement to those very addresses.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does Hewlett-Packard have not one but TWO /8 IPv4 address ranges [ iana.org ] ?
Ai n't they heard of NAT ?
How many other corporations have legacy /8 addresses and are holding on to them , not because they need them but because their laziness to move towards efficient use of those addresses creates a sense of entitlement to those very addresses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does Hewlett-Packard have not one but TWO /8 IPv4 address ranges [iana.org]?
Ain't they heard of NAT?
How many other corporations have legacy /8 addresses and are holding on to them, not because they need them but because their laziness to move towards efficient use of those addresses creates a sense of entitlement to those very addresses.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883956</id>
	<title>Re:How's NAT64 coming along?</title>
	<author>bbn</author>
	<datestamp>1264338900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NAT between v4 and v6 has been deprecated.</p><p>The solution is dual stack. Each machine will have both a v4 and a v6 address. The v4 address will be subject to NAT. The v6 will be used because you need it for peer to peer traffic such as voice over IP.</p><p>People without dual stack will be in for a hard awakening the day servers start appearing with only v6 because they couldn't afford a v4.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NAT between v4 and v6 has been deprecated.The solution is dual stack .
Each machine will have both a v4 and a v6 address .
The v4 address will be subject to NAT .
The v6 will be used because you need it for peer to peer traffic such as voice over IP.People without dual stack will be in for a hard awakening the day servers start appearing with only v6 because they could n't afford a v4 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NAT between v4 and v6 has been deprecated.The solution is dual stack.
Each machine will have both a v4 and a v6 address.
The v4 address will be subject to NAT.
The v6 will be used because you need it for peer to peer traffic such as voice over IP.People without dual stack will be in for a hard awakening the day servers start appearing with only v6 because they couldn't afford a v4.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884120</id>
	<title>Re:Ill bet this will happen</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1264339980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As a side curiosity, I wonder how many public IPv4 IPs are actually in use.</p></div><p>A better question might involve the number of them which need to be in use. Most of these companies with a class A only have a small percentage of IPs being used for public services. The rest could be handled through NAT with 1:100 mappings or so.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a side curiosity , I wonder how many public IPv4 IPs are actually in use.A better question might involve the number of them which need to be in use .
Most of these companies with a class A only have a small percentage of IPs being used for public services .
The rest could be handled through NAT with 1 : 100 mappings or so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a side curiosity, I wonder how many public IPv4 IPs are actually in use.A better question might involve the number of them which need to be in use.
Most of these companies with a class A only have a small percentage of IPs being used for public services.
The rest could be handled through NAT with 1:100 mappings or so.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883276</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883690</id>
	<title>Re:Oh well...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264337220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><b>APNIC</b>, it's Asia-Pacific, you insensitive (and technically incompetent) clod!</htmltext>
<tokenext>APNIC , it 's Asia-Pacific , you insensitive ( and technically incompetent ) clod !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>APNIC, it's Asia-Pacific, you insensitive (and technically incompetent) clod!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30890030</id>
	<title>Re:they should start selling IPadresses like phone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264435020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>or 29.09.19.69 (my bday)</p></div><p>So if you had your Social Security number as an IP address, what would it be?</p></div><p>000::00:0001</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>or 29.09.19.69 ( my bday ) So if you had your Social Security number as an IP address , what would it be ? 000 : : 00 : 0001</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or 29.09.19.69 (my bday)So if you had your Social Security number as an IP address, what would it be?000::00:0001
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883524</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887334</id>
	<title>Re:Dual stack is NOT the solution.</title>
	<author>butlerm</author>
	<datestamp>1264411740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dual stack will not buy us <em>any</em> time, because it does not affect the number of routeable (public) IPv4 addresses required.  The only thing dual stack expedites is some future day when we (effectively) cut off all the IPv4 only hosts from the Internet (or make them use v4v6 NAT).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dual stack will not buy us any time , because it does not affect the number of routeable ( public ) IPv4 addresses required .
The only thing dual stack expedites is some future day when we ( effectively ) cut off all the IPv4 only hosts from the Internet ( or make them use v4v6 NAT ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dual stack will not buy us any time, because it does not affect the number of routeable (public) IPv4 addresses required.
The only thing dual stack expedites is some future day when we (effectively) cut off all the IPv4 only hosts from the Internet (or make them use v4v6 NAT).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885662</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30893374</id>
	<title>Re:AnoNet</title>
	<author>Ksevio</author>
	<datestamp>1264447140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually the full 127/8 is reserved for loopback.  So 127.43.222.5 works just as well as 127.0.0.1</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually the full 127/8 is reserved for loopback .
So 127.43.222.5 works just as well as 127.0.0.1</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually the full 127/8 is reserved for loopback.
So 127.43.222.5 works just as well as 127.0.0.1</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886008</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883874</id>
	<title>Re:What about getting back some...</title>
	<author>QuantumRiff</author>
	<datestamp>1264338420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Someday, everyone will eventually realize you don't increase the availability of an item much by increasing it by 1/256th.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Someday , everyone will eventually realize you do n't increase the availability of an item much by increasing it by 1/256th .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someday, everyone will eventually realize you don't increase the availability of an item much by increasing it by 1/256th.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883366</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883884</id>
	<title>Re:they should start selling IPadresses like phone</title>
	<author>Rich0</author>
	<datestamp>1264338420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Only issue with that is how the routing system works.  Routers are incapable of keeping track of where every single individual IP is located on the internet.  Instead they just get announcements for very large networks, and then as the packet gets closer to its destination it can be tracked with greater and greater granularity.</p><p>Dynamic DNS is a much better approach - it separates the implementation of the naming and the routing functions.</p><p>I have no idea how the phone system manages to handle number portability.  I suspect that either they just rely on the fact that relatively few numbers are ported, or they do a one-time lookup on the phone number to get a different "real" network address for the phone and use that for the routing.  That basically just treats the phone number as a DNS address and your local switch as the real IP address.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only issue with that is how the routing system works .
Routers are incapable of keeping track of where every single individual IP is located on the internet .
Instead they just get announcements for very large networks , and then as the packet gets closer to its destination it can be tracked with greater and greater granularity.Dynamic DNS is a much better approach - it separates the implementation of the naming and the routing functions.I have no idea how the phone system manages to handle number portability .
I suspect that either they just rely on the fact that relatively few numbers are ported , or they do a one-time lookup on the phone number to get a different " real " network address for the phone and use that for the routing .
That basically just treats the phone number as a DNS address and your local switch as the real IP address .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only issue with that is how the routing system works.
Routers are incapable of keeping track of where every single individual IP is located on the internet.
Instead they just get announcements for very large networks, and then as the packet gets closer to its destination it can be tracked with greater and greater granularity.Dynamic DNS is a much better approach - it separates the implementation of the naming and the routing functions.I have no idea how the phone system manages to handle number portability.
I suspect that either they just rely on the fact that relatively few numbers are ported, or they do a one-time lookup on the phone number to get a different "real" network address for the phone and use that for the routing.
That basically just treats the phone number as a DNS address and your local switch as the real IP address.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883342</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883794</id>
	<title>Unfortunately, applications still behind the curve</title>
	<author>Abcd1234</author>
	<datestamp>1264337760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I discovered m0n0wall 1.3 hit the pavement, with support for IPv6, I made the move to transition my home network to v6, for no other reason than it seemed like an interesting thing to do (what can I say, I like to tinker).  In the process, I looked to moving all my services to v6... obviously I can't completely abandon v4 internally, but I figured, why not move all my internal stuff over?  Problem is, among the software I use, the following don't support v6 at all:</p><p>Linux NFS client and server<br>MySQL<br>MythTV<br>rtorrent<br>m0n0wall's VPN implementations (both IPSec (ironically) and PPTP)</p><p>And those are just the first four that popped up (though at least I was able to patch rtorrent).  God knows what other software out there doesn't support v6.  Of course, many of these things can live in private v4 networks for the time being, but until application vendors catch up with the times, it seems v4 and v6 will be living side-by-side for a long time to come.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I discovered m0n0wall 1.3 hit the pavement , with support for IPv6 , I made the move to transition my home network to v6 , for no other reason than it seemed like an interesting thing to do ( what can I say , I like to tinker ) .
In the process , I looked to moving all my services to v6... obviously I ca n't completely abandon v4 internally , but I figured , why not move all my internal stuff over ?
Problem is , among the software I use , the following do n't support v6 at all : Linux NFS client and serverMySQLMythTVrtorrentm0n0wall 's VPN implementations ( both IPSec ( ironically ) and PPTP ) And those are just the first four that popped up ( though at least I was able to patch rtorrent ) .
God knows what other software out there does n't support v6 .
Of course , many of these things can live in private v4 networks for the time being , but until application vendors catch up with the times , it seems v4 and v6 will be living side-by-side for a long time to come .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I discovered m0n0wall 1.3 hit the pavement, with support for IPv6, I made the move to transition my home network to v6, for no other reason than it seemed like an interesting thing to do (what can I say, I like to tinker).
In the process, I looked to moving all my services to v6... obviously I can't completely abandon v4 internally, but I figured, why not move all my internal stuff over?
Problem is, among the software I use, the following don't support v6 at all:Linux NFS client and serverMySQLMythTVrtorrentm0n0wall's VPN implementations (both IPSec (ironically) and PPTP)And those are just the first four that popped up (though at least I was able to patch rtorrent).
God knows what other software out there doesn't support v6.
Of course, many of these things can live in private v4 networks for the time being, but until application vendors catch up with the times, it seems v4 and v6 will be living side-by-side for a long time to come.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883906</id>
	<title>Re:Not using any bogons over here</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264338660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.exploit-db.com/download\_pdf/11194" title="exploit-db.com" rel="nofollow">No kidding.</a> [exploit-db.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>No kidding .
[ exploit-db.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No kidding.
[exploit-db.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30890398</id>
	<title>Re:Why should we care about idiots?</title>
	<author>cffrost</author>
	<datestamp>1264436460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Who cares?</p></div><p>Hmm, I dunno. Perhaps you're ri...</p><p><div class="quote"><p>No, really: Who cares?</p></div><p>Whoa! Back off man, I said I don't fucking know. You win, okay? Jesus...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who cares ? Hmm , I dunno .
Perhaps you 're ri...No , really : Who cares ? Whoa !
Back off man , I said I do n't fucking know .
You win , okay ?
Jesus.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who cares?Hmm, I dunno.
Perhaps you're ri...No, really: Who cares?Whoa!
Back off man, I said I don't fucking know.
You win, okay?
Jesus...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883428</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884018</id>
	<title>Re:Install your own 6to4 tunnel today</title>
	<author>Omnifarious</author>
	<datestamp>1264339380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been trying to convince anybody who does setup for small networks to just do this as a matter of course.  ISPs keep telling me nobody asks for IPv6.  If they saw enough traffic to 192.88.99.1 they might change their tune.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been trying to convince anybody who does setup for small networks to just do this as a matter of course .
ISPs keep telling me nobody asks for IPv6 .
If they saw enough traffic to 192.88.99.1 they might change their tune .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been trying to convince anybody who does setup for small networks to just do this as a matter of course.
ISPs keep telling me nobody asks for IPv6.
If they saw enough traffic to 192.88.99.1 they might change their tune.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883394</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884654</id>
	<title>Perfect! We won't need them.</title>
	<author>ImYourVirus</author>
	<datestamp>1264344060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>regional registry exhaustion by late 2012</p></div><p>

This is excellent timing. For what you ask? Then end of the world is all, hence we won't need anymore [IP's].<br> <br>

Good timing chaps!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>regional registry exhaustion by late 2012 This is excellent timing .
For what you ask ?
Then end of the world is all , hence we wo n't need anymore [ IP 's ] .
Good timing chaps !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>regional registry exhaustion by late 2012

This is excellent timing.
For what you ask?
Then end of the world is all, hence we won't need anymore [IP's].
Good timing chaps!
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884062</id>
	<title>Re:Ill bet this will happen</title>
	<author>rtb61</author>
	<datestamp>1264339680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> Something else will also happen, business with lots of IPv4 addresses, available for hire, will do everything they can to fend of IPv6, corporate lobbyists, marketing lies etc. Why, obviously as new addresses become unavailable they can significantly via artificiality induced scarcity ramp up the price and profit margins. </p><p> On the other side, the shear number of IPv6 addresses means that every network connected device can have it's own unique IP address hard coded at the factory, specific for the region where it is to be sold. </p><p> IPv6 for the end user means, that the modem, firewall, router, switch, wireless hub, will also become a mail, web, file, P2P, sever via a built in SSD (or an aold fashioned hard drive) with simple browser based gui configuration (most likely ISP specific supplied configuration file, it is cheaper for them if you do your own email). Want some privacy in your email, do your own mail serving.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Something else will also happen , business with lots of IPv4 addresses , available for hire , will do everything they can to fend of IPv6 , corporate lobbyists , marketing lies etc .
Why , obviously as new addresses become unavailable they can significantly via artificiality induced scarcity ramp up the price and profit margins .
On the other side , the shear number of IPv6 addresses means that every network connected device can have it 's own unique IP address hard coded at the factory , specific for the region where it is to be sold .
IPv6 for the end user means , that the modem , firewall , router , switch , wireless hub , will also become a mail , web , file , P2P , sever via a built in SSD ( or an aold fashioned hard drive ) with simple browser based gui configuration ( most likely ISP specific supplied configuration file , it is cheaper for them if you do your own email ) .
Want some privacy in your email , do your own mail serving .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Something else will also happen, business with lots of IPv4 addresses, available for hire, will do everything they can to fend of IPv6, corporate lobbyists, marketing lies etc.
Why, obviously as new addresses become unavailable they can significantly via artificiality induced scarcity ramp up the price and profit margins.
On the other side, the shear number of IPv6 addresses means that every network connected device can have it's own unique IP address hard coded at the factory, specific for the region where it is to be sold.
IPv6 for the end user means, that the modem, firewall, router, switch, wireless hub, will also become a mail, web, file, P2P, sever via a built in SSD (or an aold fashioned hard drive) with simple browser based gui configuration (most likely ISP specific supplied configuration file, it is cheaper for them if you do your own email).
Want some privacy in your email, do your own mail serving.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883276</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883348</id>
	<title>Desirable?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264335300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why are some IP addresses more desirable than others? They are just numbers after all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why are some IP addresses more desirable than others ?
They are just numbers after all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why are some IP addresses more desirable than others?
They are just numbers after all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886068</id>
	<title>IPv6 Unique Local Addressing + IPv4 NAT works</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264355340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Since July 2007, I have developed and maintained a dual-stack IPv4+IPv6 network for my employer. Considering the recent news, I will be publishing more on my internal work ASAP. Here's what you can do to get started...<br>
<br>
1. Most offices can run off a single IPv4 static IP address: the majority of my sites use 192.168.1.0/24 internally.<br>
2. For permanent internal IPv6 access, I route <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unique\_local\_address" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Unique Local Addresses</a> [wikipedia.org] to each site. All the company uses a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/48, with each site its own<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/64. You can also co-route global address ranges with IPv6: so I have a second set of addresses based on a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/48 I get from HE.net's tunnel broker; I've been able to switch to that from SixXS subnets without having to reprogram 200+ internal DNS entries because of the ULA range.<br>
3. I use tinc to link together my IPv6 sites over IPv4 Internet: <a href="http://tinc-vpn.org/examples/ipv6-network/" title="tinc-vpn.org" rel="nofollow">this is the original work I did back in 2007</a> [tinc-vpn.org]; I've long since figured out how to dynamically route with OSPFv3 instead of static routes.<br>
4.I've been regularly blogging about my IPv6 findings in my tech blog, as well as collaborating with a friend or two via StumbleUpon &amp; Facebook. <a href="http://unquietwiki.blogspot.com/search?q=IPv6" title="blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">http://unquietwiki.blogspot.com/search?q=IPv6</a> [blogspot.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since July 2007 , I have developed and maintained a dual-stack IPv4 + IPv6 network for my employer .
Considering the recent news , I will be publishing more on my internal work ASAP .
Here 's what you can do to get started.. . 1. Most offices can run off a single IPv4 static IP address : the majority of my sites use 192.168.1.0/24 internally .
2. For permanent internal IPv6 access , I route Unique Local Addresses [ wikipedia.org ] to each site .
All the company uses a /48 , with each site its own /64 .
You can also co-route global address ranges with IPv6 : so I have a second set of addresses based on a /48 I get from HE.net 's tunnel broker ; I 've been able to switch to that from SixXS subnets without having to reprogram 200 + internal DNS entries because of the ULA range .
3. I use tinc to link together my IPv6 sites over IPv4 Internet : this is the original work I did back in 2007 [ tinc-vpn.org ] ; I 've long since figured out how to dynamically route with OSPFv3 instead of static routes .
4.I 've been regularly blogging about my IPv6 findings in my tech blog , as well as collaborating with a friend or two via StumbleUpon &amp; Facebook .
http : //unquietwiki.blogspot.com/search ? q = IPv6 [ blogspot.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since July 2007, I have developed and maintained a dual-stack IPv4+IPv6 network for my employer.
Considering the recent news, I will be publishing more on my internal work ASAP.
Here's what you can do to get started...

1. Most offices can run off a single IPv4 static IP address: the majority of my sites use 192.168.1.0/24 internally.
2. For permanent internal IPv6 access, I route Unique Local Addresses [wikipedia.org] to each site.
All the company uses a /48, with each site its own /64.
You can also co-route global address ranges with IPv6: so I have a second set of addresses based on a /48 I get from HE.net's tunnel broker; I've been able to switch to that from SixXS subnets without having to reprogram 200+ internal DNS entries because of the ULA range.
3. I use tinc to link together my IPv6 sites over IPv4 Internet: this is the original work I did back in 2007 [tinc-vpn.org]; I've long since figured out how to dynamically route with OSPFv3 instead of static routes.
4.I've been regularly blogging about my IPv6 findings in my tech blog, as well as collaborating with a friend or two via StumbleUpon &amp; Facebook.
http://unquietwiki.blogspot.com/search?q=IPv6 [blogspot.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883502</id>
	<title>Re:audits...</title>
	<author>compro01</author>
	<datestamp>1264336140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem with that is the the issuing of IP space back when a lot of those were handed out have no provisions for auditing, use accountability,  or reclamation.  That means you're looking at a long ugly legal battle, and even if you do win, you buy a little less than one month per<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/8 reclaimed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with that is the the issuing of IP space back when a lot of those were handed out have no provisions for auditing , use accountability , or reclamation .
That means you 're looking at a long ugly legal battle , and even if you do win , you buy a little less than one month per /8 reclaimed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with that is the the issuing of IP space back when a lot of those were handed out have no provisions for auditing, use accountability,  or reclamation.
That means you're looking at a long ugly legal battle, and even if you do win, you buy a little less than one month per /8 reclaimed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885904</id>
	<title>NAT</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264353660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>are those countries too poor to implement NAT or something?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>are those countries too poor to implement NAT or something ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>are those countries too poor to implement NAT or something?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883856</id>
	<title>Re:What about getting back some...</title>
	<author>diamondsw</author>
	<datestamp>1264338240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, I'm sure that AT&amp;T as a global networking company has no need of those IP addresses. And yes, I'm well aware of the magnitudes involved.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , I 'm sure that AT&amp;T as a global networking company has no need of those IP addresses .
And yes , I 'm well aware of the magnitudes involved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, I'm sure that AT&amp;T as a global networking company has no need of those IP addresses.
And yes, I'm well aware of the magnitudes involved.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883366</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884342</id>
	<title>Re: People without dual stack</title>
	<author>Mike Rice</author>
	<datestamp>1264341780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Which begs the question... how many single stack systems are left out there? Is this really an issue?</p><p>All current desktop operating systems are dual stack capable.</p><p>Most current 'big iron' routers, switches &amp; etc are dual stack capable.</p><p>Lower level stuff like dumb switches don't give a damn.</p><p>That pretty much leaves the consumer grade DSL and Cable gateway.<br>Newer ones are dual stack, but most aren't.<br>However, given the crappy quality of these devices, they will all be doorstops within a couple of years... and replaced with dual stack gateways ( of similar crappy quality).</p><p>So should we really be worried about leaving anyone behind?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Which begs the question... how many single stack systems are left out there ?
Is this really an issue ? All current desktop operating systems are dual stack capable.Most current 'big iron ' routers , switches &amp; etc are dual stack capable.Lower level stuff like dumb switches do n't give a damn.That pretty much leaves the consumer grade DSL and Cable gateway.Newer ones are dual stack , but most are n't.However , given the crappy quality of these devices , they will all be doorstops within a couple of years... and replaced with dual stack gateways ( of similar crappy quality ) .So should we really be worried about leaving anyone behind ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which begs the question... how many single stack systems are left out there?
Is this really an issue?All current desktop operating systems are dual stack capable.Most current 'big iron' routers, switches &amp; etc are dual stack capable.Lower level stuff like dumb switches don't give a damn.That pretty much leaves the consumer grade DSL and Cable gateway.Newer ones are dual stack, but most aren't.However, given the crappy quality of these devices, they will all be doorstops within a couple of years... and replaced with dual stack gateways ( of similar crappy quality).So should we really be worried about leaving anyone behind?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883956</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883522</id>
	<title>Re:What about getting back some...</title>
	<author>wumpus188</author>
	<datestamp>1264336320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can have my 127/8 when you pry it from my cold dead fingers, you insensitive clod!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can have my 127/8 when you pry it from my cold dead fingers , you insensitive clod !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can have my 127/8 when you pry it from my cold dead fingers, you insensitive clod!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883366</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883626</id>
	<title>Re:What about getting back some...</title>
	<author>Vandilzer</author>
	<datestamp>1264336800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Let me ask you this...</p><p>If you have a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/8 would you give it back with out a fight?</p><p>No, I thought not, and these companies pay lawyers to sit around, and in some cases pay the judges or just others to write the laws....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let me ask you this...If you have a /8 would you give it back with out a fight ? No , I thought not , and these companies pay lawyers to sit around , and in some cases pay the judges or just others to write the laws... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let me ask you this...If you have a /8 would you give it back with out a fight?No, I thought not, and these companies pay lawyers to sit around, and in some cases pay the judges or just others to write the laws....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883366</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883244</id>
	<title>AnoNet</title>
	<author>sopssa</author>
	<datestamp>1264334580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AnoNet" title="wikipedia.org">AnoNet</a> [wikipedia.org] is one of those who use 1.0.0.0/8 for private VPN because everyone thought it wouldn't be in use. I am pretty sure there are A LOT of organizations and other services who do too.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>anoNet is a decentralized friend-to-friend network built using VPNs and software BGP routers. anoNet works by making it difficult to learn the identities of others on the network allowing them to anonymously host content and IPv4 services. Assuming that a router administrator on such a metanet knows only information about the adjacent routers, standard routing protocols can take care of finding the proper path for a packet to take to reach its destination. All destinations further than one hop can for most people's threat models be considered anonymous. This is because only your immediate peers know your IP. Anyone not directly connected to you only knows you by an IP in the 1.0.0.0/8 range, and that IP is not necessarily tied to any identifiable information.</p><p>To avoid addressing conflict with the internet itself, the range 1.0.0.0/8 is used. This is to avoid conflicting with internal networks such as 10/8, 172.16/12 and 192.168/16, as well as assigned Internet ranges. As of January 2010 IANA has allocated 1/8 to APNIC.[1] If the service does not switch to another address range then Internet hosts using 1.0.0.0/8 will be inaccessible to AnoNet users.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>AnoNet [ wikipedia.org ] is one of those who use 1.0.0.0/8 for private VPN because everyone thought it would n't be in use .
I am pretty sure there are A LOT of organizations and other services who do too.anoNet is a decentralized friend-to-friend network built using VPNs and software BGP routers .
anoNet works by making it difficult to learn the identities of others on the network allowing them to anonymously host content and IPv4 services .
Assuming that a router administrator on such a metanet knows only information about the adjacent routers , standard routing protocols can take care of finding the proper path for a packet to take to reach its destination .
All destinations further than one hop can for most people 's threat models be considered anonymous .
This is because only your immediate peers know your IP .
Anyone not directly connected to you only knows you by an IP in the 1.0.0.0/8 range , and that IP is not necessarily tied to any identifiable information.To avoid addressing conflict with the internet itself , the range 1.0.0.0/8 is used .
This is to avoid conflicting with internal networks such as 10/8 , 172.16/12 and 192.168/16 , as well as assigned Internet ranges .
As of January 2010 IANA has allocated 1/8 to APNIC .
[ 1 ] If the service does not switch to another address range then Internet hosts using 1.0.0.0/8 will be inaccessible to AnoNet users .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AnoNet [wikipedia.org] is one of those who use 1.0.0.0/8 for private VPN because everyone thought it wouldn't be in use.
I am pretty sure there are A LOT of organizations and other services who do too.anoNet is a decentralized friend-to-friend network built using VPNs and software BGP routers.
anoNet works by making it difficult to learn the identities of others on the network allowing them to anonymously host content and IPv4 services.
Assuming that a router administrator on such a metanet knows only information about the adjacent routers, standard routing protocols can take care of finding the proper path for a packet to take to reach its destination.
All destinations further than one hop can for most people's threat models be considered anonymous.
This is because only your immediate peers know your IP.
Anyone not directly connected to you only knows you by an IP in the 1.0.0.0/8 range, and that IP is not necessarily tied to any identifiable information.To avoid addressing conflict with the internet itself, the range 1.0.0.0/8 is used.
This is to avoid conflicting with internal networks such as 10/8, 172.16/12 and 192.168/16, as well as assigned Internet ranges.
As of January 2010 IANA has allocated 1/8 to APNIC.
[1] If the service does not switch to another address range then Internet hosts using 1.0.0.0/8 will be inaccessible to AnoNet users.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883636</id>
	<title>I would pay good money....</title>
	<author>Filgy</author>
	<datestamp>1264336920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>....for 1.3.3.7...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>....for 1.3.3.7... : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>....for 1.3.3.7... :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883786</id>
	<title>Re:they should start selling IPadresses like phone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264337700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thanks! Your slashdot, facebook, and email accounts are MINE!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thanks !
Your slashdot , facebook , and email accounts are MINE !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thanks!
Your slashdot, facebook, and email accounts are MINE!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883342</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887438</id>
	<title>Re:Install your own 6to4 tunnel today</title>
	<author>jbgeek</author>
	<datestamp>1264412820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Hi there,</p><p>What are the variables SLA\_INTF and INTF\_ID supposed to be in your script above?</p><p>Without them it calculates my ipv6 address as: 2002:5e4b:cf23:0000::0000 (from 94.75.207.35) which doesn't look right to me.</p><p>Thanks</p></div><p>The entire <tt>2002::/16</tt> IPv6 block is reserved for 6to4.  The address above isn't a full address, it's a 6to4 prefix (more succinctly represented as <tt>2002:5e4b:cf23::/48</tt>).  Basically, a 6to4 prefix is <tt>2002:[half of your IPv4 in hex]:[2nd half]::/48</tt>.  The <tt>5e 4b cf 23</tt> <i>is</i> <tt>94.75.207.35</tt> in hex.  So the address is correct.</p><p>You then take your prefix and use it as<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/64s on your interface and LAN(s), giving you 16 bits of network field to work with (yes, 65,536 subnets possible).  For instance, you could set your 6to4 router's 6to4 interface address to <tt>2002:5e4b:cf23::1/64</tt> (which is shorthand for <tt>2002:5e4b:cf23:0000:0000:0000:0000:0001/64</tt><nobr> <wbr></nobr>... double colon represents a run of zeros).  Then you could set your inside LAN prefix to say <tt>2002:5e4b:cf23:1::/64</tt> (<tt>2002:5e4b:cf23:<b>0001</b>:0000:0000:0000:0000/64</tt>), so the inside LAN IPv6 on your 6to4 router might be <tt>2002:5e4b:cf23:1::1/64</tt> (as in IPv4 I tend to use host number 1 as my router IP).  You have the entire 4th quad to use for LANs/subnets (<tt>2002:5e4b:cf23:0:: - 2002:5e4b:cf23:ffff::</tt>), so you could use any of 'em.</p><p>Your 6to4 router will encapsulate your IPv6 traffic in a a 6in4 tunnel packet (IPv4 protocol 41), and send it to the 6to4 tunnel server.  If you use the anycast address for 6to4 servers (<tt>192.88.99.1</tt>) for the tunnel destination, it's <i>supposed</i> to send it to the closest 6to4 server, but unfortunately it's at the mercy of your ISP &amp; BGP where it goes, so sometimes it's best to find the closest one to you and use that instead of the anycast.</p><p>Return traffic gets sent back to the IPv4 address encoded in the 2nd and 3rd quads of the IPv6 address.  Obviously, if your ISP changes your IPv4 frequently, this could be annoying, since your IPv6 prefix will change with it.  One of the reasons I stick with statically configured 6in4 tunnels for my IPv6 connectivity.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>Also, word to the wise, if you get IPv6 going one way or another, make sure you have ip6tables running and configured on your router, otherwise all your machines will be wide open on the IPv6 internet with no firewall!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hi there,What are the variables SLA \ _INTF and INTF \ _ID supposed to be in your script above ? Without them it calculates my ipv6 address as : 2002 : 5e4b : cf23 : 0000 : : 0000 ( from 94.75.207.35 ) which does n't look right to me.ThanksThe entire 2002 : : /16 IPv6 block is reserved for 6to4 .
The address above is n't a full address , it 's a 6to4 prefix ( more succinctly represented as 2002 : 5e4b : cf23 : : /48 ) .
Basically , a 6to4 prefix is 2002 : [ half of your IPv4 in hex ] : [ 2nd half ] : : /48 .
The 5e 4b cf 23 is 94.75.207.35 in hex .
So the address is correct.You then take your prefix and use it as /64s on your interface and LAN ( s ) , giving you 16 bits of network field to work with ( yes , 65,536 subnets possible ) .
For instance , you could set your 6to4 router 's 6to4 interface address to 2002 : 5e4b : cf23 : : 1/64 ( which is shorthand for 2002 : 5e4b : cf23 : 0000 : 0000 : 0000 : 0000 : 0001/64 ... double colon represents a run of zeros ) .
Then you could set your inside LAN prefix to say 2002 : 5e4b : cf23 : 1 : : /64 ( 2002 : 5e4b : cf23 : 0001 : 0000 : 0000 : 0000 : 0000/64 ) , so the inside LAN IPv6 on your 6to4 router might be 2002 : 5e4b : cf23 : 1 : : 1/64 ( as in IPv4 I tend to use host number 1 as my router IP ) .
You have the entire 4th quad to use for LANs/subnets ( 2002 : 5e4b : cf23 : 0 : : - 2002 : 5e4b : cf23 : ffff : : ) , so you could use any of 'em.Your 6to4 router will encapsulate your IPv6 traffic in a a 6in4 tunnel packet ( IPv4 protocol 41 ) , and send it to the 6to4 tunnel server .
If you use the anycast address for 6to4 servers ( 192.88.99.1 ) for the tunnel destination , it 's supposed to send it to the closest 6to4 server , but unfortunately it 's at the mercy of your ISP &amp; BGP where it goes , so sometimes it 's best to find the closest one to you and use that instead of the anycast.Return traffic gets sent back to the IPv4 address encoded in the 2nd and 3rd quads of the IPv6 address .
Obviously , if your ISP changes your IPv4 frequently , this could be annoying , since your IPv6 prefix will change with it .
One of the reasons I stick with statically configured 6in4 tunnels for my IPv6 connectivity .
: ) Also , word to the wise , if you get IPv6 going one way or another , make sure you have ip6tables running and configured on your router , otherwise all your machines will be wide open on the IPv6 internet with no firewall !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hi there,What are the variables SLA\_INTF and INTF\_ID supposed to be in your script above?Without them it calculates my ipv6 address as: 2002:5e4b:cf23:0000::0000 (from 94.75.207.35) which doesn't look right to me.ThanksThe entire 2002::/16 IPv6 block is reserved for 6to4.
The address above isn't a full address, it's a 6to4 prefix (more succinctly represented as 2002:5e4b:cf23::/48).
Basically, a 6to4 prefix is 2002:[half of your IPv4 in hex]:[2nd half]::/48.
The 5e 4b cf 23 is 94.75.207.35 in hex.
So the address is correct.You then take your prefix and use it as /64s on your interface and LAN(s), giving you 16 bits of network field to work with (yes, 65,536 subnets possible).
For instance, you could set your 6to4 router's 6to4 interface address to 2002:5e4b:cf23::1/64 (which is shorthand for 2002:5e4b:cf23:0000:0000:0000:0000:0001/64 ... double colon represents a run of zeros).
Then you could set your inside LAN prefix to say 2002:5e4b:cf23:1::/64 (2002:5e4b:cf23:0001:0000:0000:0000:0000/64), so the inside LAN IPv6 on your 6to4 router might be 2002:5e4b:cf23:1::1/64 (as in IPv4 I tend to use host number 1 as my router IP).
You have the entire 4th quad to use for LANs/subnets (2002:5e4b:cf23:0:: - 2002:5e4b:cf23:ffff::), so you could use any of 'em.Your 6to4 router will encapsulate your IPv6 traffic in a a 6in4 tunnel packet (IPv4 protocol 41), and send it to the 6to4 tunnel server.
If you use the anycast address for 6to4 servers (192.88.99.1) for the tunnel destination, it's supposed to send it to the closest 6to4 server, but unfortunately it's at the mercy of your ISP &amp; BGP where it goes, so sometimes it's best to find the closest one to you and use that instead of the anycast.Return traffic gets sent back to the IPv4 address encoded in the 2nd and 3rd quads of the IPv6 address.
Obviously, if your ISP changes your IPv4 frequently, this could be annoying, since your IPv6 prefix will change with it.
One of the reasons I stick with statically configured 6in4 tunnels for my IPv6 connectivity.
:)Also, word to the wise, if you get IPv6 going one way or another, make sure you have ip6tables running and configured on your router, otherwise all your machines will be wide open on the IPv6 internet with no firewall!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884134</id>
	<title>sky is falling. cats/dogs living together</title>
	<author>timmarhy</author>
	<datestamp>1264340160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>please, i'm so bored with this constant bullshit about ip4 running out. they were predicting the end of the internets due to lack of ip space back in the 90s. ffs FIND A NEW STORY YOUR TWATS!!!!<p>
ip6 hasn't rolled out in any big way because there's no need, end of story PLEASE!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>please , i 'm so bored with this constant bullshit about ip4 running out .
they were predicting the end of the internets due to lack of ip space back in the 90s .
ffs FIND A NEW STORY YOUR TWATS ! ! ! !
ip6 has n't rolled out in any big way because there 's no need , end of story PLEASE !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>please, i'm so bored with this constant bullshit about ip4 running out.
they were predicting the end of the internets due to lack of ip space back in the 90s.
ffs FIND A NEW STORY YOUR TWATS!!!!
ip6 hasn't rolled out in any big way because there's no need, end of story PLEASE!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884226</id>
	<title>Re:Map of the Internet</title>
	<author>Lennie</author>
	<datestamp>1264340940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This one is almost up to date:<br><br>http://www.personal.psu.edu/dvm105/blogs/ipv6/2009/08/and-another-two-are-off.html<br><br>if you add these 4, then you'll be up to date:<br>http://www.personal.psu.edu/dvm105/blogs/ipv6/2009/09/two-more-gone.html<br>http://www.personal.psu.edu/dvm105/blogs/ipv6/2010/01/ipv4-free-pool-drops-below-10.html</htmltext>
<tokenext>This one is almost up to date : http : //www.personal.psu.edu/dvm105/blogs/ipv6/2009/08/and-another-two-are-off.htmlif you add these 4 , then you 'll be up to date : http : //www.personal.psu.edu/dvm105/blogs/ipv6/2009/09/two-more-gone.htmlhttp : //www.personal.psu.edu/dvm105/blogs/ipv6/2010/01/ipv4-free-pool-drops-below-10.html</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This one is almost up to date:http://www.personal.psu.edu/dvm105/blogs/ipv6/2009/08/and-another-two-are-off.htmlif you add these 4, then you'll be up to date:http://www.personal.psu.edu/dvm105/blogs/ipv6/2009/09/two-more-gone.htmlhttp://www.personal.psu.edu/dvm105/blogs/ipv6/2010/01/ipv4-free-pool-drops-below-10.html</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883510</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884912</id>
	<title>Re:IPv6?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264345620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>AND GET OFF MY LAWN!</htmltext>
<tokenext>AND GET OFF MY LAWN !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AND GET OFF MY LAWN!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884616</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887244</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunately, applications still behind the cu</title>
	<author>zdzichu</author>
	<datestamp>1264410720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IPv6 for NFS is available since Linux 2.6.30, according to <a href="http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/NFSClientIPv6" title="fedoraproject.org">http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/NFSClientIPv6</a> [fedoraproject.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IPv6 for NFS is available since Linux 2.6.30 , according to http : //fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/NFSClientIPv6 [ fedoraproject.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IPv6 for NFS is available since Linux 2.6.30, according to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/NFSClientIPv6 [fedoraproject.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886808</id>
	<title>Re:What about getting back some...</title>
	<author>Deanalator</author>
	<datestamp>1264362780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Also MIT has 18/8 which they are hardly using.  I don't see why any university would need more than a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/16.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Also MIT has 18/8 which they are hardly using .
I do n't see why any university would need more than a /16 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also MIT has 18/8 which they are hardly using.
I don't see why any university would need more than a /16.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883366</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886206</id>
	<title>I don't see the problem</title>
	<author>OrangeTide</author>
	<datestamp>1264356480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just quite assigning IPv4 addresses, especially garbage ones that people without a lot of brains have been using for LANs in violation of the spec for years.</p><p>The pain will go away when we really are forced to use IPv6. The technology is here, and it already works. When Cable and DSL customers can't access websites, then their providers will have no choice but to pull themselves into the 21st century. If they don't do it, then that is simply an opportunity for a business to provide IPv6 tunneling to people. I could easily see IPv4-only customers who need to remotely access their employer to pay for such a service. And once some clever person figures out that they can buy IPv4 addresses from people and sell them at huge mark-ups to businesses that want them for their main online sales presence. Not unlike what happened when the phone company ran out of 800 numbers and started issuing 888 and 866 numbers, people with old non-commercial 800 numbers were being contacts to buy their number (in the 1990s, often a family would get an 800 toll-free number so their college attending kids can call without a calling card)</p><p>I don't mean to trivialize the whole IPv4 panic, but from where I sit it really does not seem like a big deal.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just quite assigning IPv4 addresses , especially garbage ones that people without a lot of brains have been using for LANs in violation of the spec for years.The pain will go away when we really are forced to use IPv6 .
The technology is here , and it already works .
When Cable and DSL customers ca n't access websites , then their providers will have no choice but to pull themselves into the 21st century .
If they do n't do it , then that is simply an opportunity for a business to provide IPv6 tunneling to people .
I could easily see IPv4-only customers who need to remotely access their employer to pay for such a service .
And once some clever person figures out that they can buy IPv4 addresses from people and sell them at huge mark-ups to businesses that want them for their main online sales presence .
Not unlike what happened when the phone company ran out of 800 numbers and started issuing 888 and 866 numbers , people with old non-commercial 800 numbers were being contacts to buy their number ( in the 1990s , often a family would get an 800 toll-free number so their college attending kids can call without a calling card ) I do n't mean to trivialize the whole IPv4 panic , but from where I sit it really does not seem like a big deal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just quite assigning IPv4 addresses, especially garbage ones that people without a lot of brains have been using for LANs in violation of the spec for years.The pain will go away when we really are forced to use IPv6.
The technology is here, and it already works.
When Cable and DSL customers can't access websites, then their providers will have no choice but to pull themselves into the 21st century.
If they don't do it, then that is simply an opportunity for a business to provide IPv6 tunneling to people.
I could easily see IPv4-only customers who need to remotely access their employer to pay for such a service.
And once some clever person figures out that they can buy IPv4 addresses from people and sell them at huge mark-ups to businesses that want them for their main online sales presence.
Not unlike what happened when the phone company ran out of 800 numbers and started issuing 888 and 866 numbers, people with old non-commercial 800 numbers were being contacts to buy their number (in the 1990s, often a family would get an 800 toll-free number so their college attending kids can call without a calling card)I don't mean to trivialize the whole IPv4 panic, but from where I sit it really does not seem like a big deal.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883486</id>
	<title>Oh well...</title>
	<author>snowtigger</author>
	<datestamp>1264336080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been using 1.1.1.1/8 at home for years. It's by far the quickest to type and remember.</p><p>I'll probably keep using it for a while, until I need to reach any of those officially allocated addresses in 1/8. Hearing they got allocated in Africa and Latina America is really good news, since I rarely go to African and Latin American websites.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been using 1.1.1.1/8 at home for years .
It 's by far the quickest to type and remember.I 'll probably keep using it for a while , until I need to reach any of those officially allocated addresses in 1/8 .
Hearing they got allocated in Africa and Latina America is really good news , since I rarely go to African and Latin American websites .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been using 1.1.1.1/8 at home for years.
It's by far the quickest to type and remember.I'll probably keep using it for a while, until I need to reach any of those officially allocated addresses in 1/8.
Hearing they got allocated in Africa and Latina America is really good news, since I rarely go to African and Latin American websites.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884280</id>
	<title>Re:Oh well...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264341420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is 10.1.1.1 too hard to type and remember?!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is 10.1.1.1 too hard to type and remember ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is 10.1.1.1 too hard to type and remember?
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883976</id>
	<title>Please Help!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264339080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>- please main distros, change to ipv6 by default if at all possible;<br>- someone please point/make a quick (one page) ipv4 to ipv6 migration guide;<br>- is there a way to make all ipv4 addresses become ipv6 with leading zeros implied?<br>- how to make the old equipment work? do they signal ipv4/6 compliance? (absence of ipv6 compliance could be understood as ipv4)</p><p>and other things I may come up with...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>- please main distros , change to ipv6 by default if at all possible ; - someone please point/make a quick ( one page ) ipv4 to ipv6 migration guide ; - is there a way to make all ipv4 addresses become ipv6 with leading zeros implied ? - how to make the old equipment work ?
do they signal ipv4/6 compliance ?
( absence of ipv6 compliance could be understood as ipv4 ) and other things I may come up with.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>- please main distros, change to ipv6 by default if at all possible;- someone please point/make a quick (one page) ipv4 to ipv6 migration guide;- is there a way to make all ipv4 addresses become ipv6 with leading zeros implied?- how to make the old equipment work?
do they signal ipv4/6 compliance?
(absence of ipv6 compliance could be understood as ipv4)and other things I may come up with...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884642</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunately, applications still behind the cu</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264344000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On the Windows side, RDP still doesn't appear to support IPV6 yet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On the Windows side , RDP still does n't appear to support IPV6 yet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the Windows side, RDP still doesn't appear to support IPV6 yet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883470</id>
	<title>Re:Desirable?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264335960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
A good example of an undesirable IP address is one that's on a bunch of spam blacklists.
</p><p>
Some IP addresses are more likely to have connectivity issues than others.
</p><p>
One major issue  improper or poorly maintained filters,  that effects most address  blocks that were previously not being assigned from equally,  hence the DEBOGON projects and testing.
</p><p>
There are more insidious issues that only effect some blocks, however.
</p><p>
For example the  guerilla  usage of  "1.0.0.0/8"  by AnoNet,  and  "5.0.0.0/8" by  Hamachi, plus private use of those, and other ranges instead of proper RFC1918 addresses  by  some  enterprises.
</p><p>
Makes hosts that use those IP addresses  <b>more likely</b> to have
communication problems with other hosts on the internet,   just  because their IP address is in that block.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A good example of an undesirable IP address is one that 's on a bunch of spam blacklists .
Some IP addresses are more likely to have connectivity issues than others .
One major issue improper or poorly maintained filters , that effects most address blocks that were previously not being assigned from equally , hence the DEBOGON projects and testing .
There are more insidious issues that only effect some blocks , however .
For example the guerilla usage of " 1.0.0.0/8 " by AnoNet , and " 5.0.0.0/8 " by Hamachi , plus private use of those , and other ranges instead of proper RFC1918 addresses by some enterprises .
Makes hosts that use those IP addresses more likely to have communication problems with other hosts on the internet , just because their IP address is in that block .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
A good example of an undesirable IP address is one that's on a bunch of spam blacklists.
Some IP addresses are more likely to have connectivity issues than others.
One major issue  improper or poorly maintained filters,  that effects most address  blocks that were previously not being assigned from equally,  hence the DEBOGON projects and testing.
There are more insidious issues that only effect some blocks, however.
For example the  guerilla  usage of  "1.0.0.0/8"  by AnoNet,  and  "5.0.0.0/8" by  Hamachi, plus private use of those, and other ranges instead of proper RFC1918 addresses  by  some  enterprises.
Makes hosts that use those IP addresses  more likely to have
communication problems with other hosts on the internet,   just  because their IP address is in that block.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30889766</id>
	<title>moving to ipv6</title>
	<author>loki9999</author>
	<datestamp>1264434060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If I were you guys, I wouldn't hang my hat on IPv6 either.  Those addresses could run out before you know it (especially since I just assigned 15 million ip addresses to my toaster oven this morning)...</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I were you guys , I would n't hang my hat on IPv6 either .
Those addresses could run out before you know it ( especially since I just assigned 15 million ip addresses to my toaster oven this morning ) .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I were you guys, I wouldn't hang my hat on IPv6 either.
Those addresses could run out before you know it (especially since I just assigned 15 million ip addresses to my toaster oven this morning)...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884472</id>
	<title>Re:Not using any bogons over here</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264342800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just out of curiosity where is this?  I have some knowledge of where TWC is (and isn't) using 10.0.0.0/8 and if you can reach a 10net address there is probably a config problem somewhere.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just out of curiosity where is this ?
I have some knowledge of where TWC is ( and is n't ) using 10.0.0.0/8 and if you can reach a 10net address there is probably a config problem somewhere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just out of curiosity where is this?
I have some knowledge of where TWC is (and isn't) using 10.0.0.0/8 and if you can reach a 10net address there is probably a config problem somewhere.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884588</id>
	<title>Re:Ill bet this will happen</title>
	<author>xlsior</author>
	<datestamp>1264343700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>What will happen will be the standard that us humans have followed throughout the ages.<br>
We will wait until the IPv4 addresses run out and then force businesses to start using IPv6 if they want to get on the internet.</i> 
<br>
Yes -- and the reason is very simple: IPv6 is great if/when everyone uses it, but there is next to no benefit in being the first one to do so...<br>
<br>
So everyone is waiting for other people to deal with the hassle first. (IPv6 isn't really a drop-in replacement, after all -- there's still sizable chunks of the national and international backbone connections that don't talk IPv6, so you still have to deal with IPv4 at the same time regardless.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What will happen will be the standard that us humans have followed throughout the ages .
We will wait until the IPv4 addresses run out and then force businesses to start using IPv6 if they want to get on the internet .
Yes -- and the reason is very simple : IPv6 is great if/when everyone uses it , but there is next to no benefit in being the first one to do so.. . So everyone is waiting for other people to deal with the hassle first .
( IPv6 is n't really a drop-in replacement , after all -- there 's still sizable chunks of the national and international backbone connections that do n't talk IPv6 , so you still have to deal with IPv4 at the same time regardless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What will happen will be the standard that us humans have followed throughout the ages.
We will wait until the IPv4 addresses run out and then force businesses to start using IPv6 if they want to get on the internet.
Yes -- and the reason is very simple: IPv6 is great if/when everyone uses it, but there is next to no benefit in being the first one to do so...

So everyone is waiting for other people to deal with the hassle first.
(IPv6 isn't really a drop-in replacement, after all -- there's still sizable chunks of the national and international backbone connections that don't talk IPv6, so you still have to deal with IPv4 at the same time regardless.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883276</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886452</id>
	<title>Re:How's NAT64 coming along?</title>
	<author>simoncpu was here</author>
	<datestamp>1264358520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>faithd(8) works fine in *BSD.</htmltext>
<tokenext>faithd ( 8 ) works fine in * BSD .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>faithd(8) works fine in *BSD.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884482</id>
	<title>Prediction: There will be a market</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264342860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Expect those that hold an outrageous, overly-sufficient block of IP addresses to begin trading the subnets for cash, if, of course, the price of trading them is less than the cost of implementing IPv6.</p><p>Anyone want to build a trading application?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Expect those that hold an outrageous , overly-sufficient block of IP addresses to begin trading the subnets for cash , if , of course , the price of trading them is less than the cost of implementing IPv6.Anyone want to build a trading application ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Expect those that hold an outrageous, overly-sufficient block of IP addresses to begin trading the subnets for cash, if, of course, the price of trading them is less than the cost of implementing IPv6.Anyone want to build a trading application?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885054</id>
	<title>Re:Is this a misprint...</title>
	<author>mysidia</author>
	<datestamp>1264346640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
ISI.EDU is no longer DoD contracter for the IANA function.
</p><p>
ICANN is the current holder of the USG contract for the IANA function.
</p><p>
Many of IANA's roles were stripped from it and assigned to other entities which makes sense.
</p><p>
Still, it is perhaps among  the saddest moments in internet history, that this change happened...
</p><p>
Good and bad things have come of it.   But don't think of IANA as a separate entity anymore, it's really just ICANN.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ISI.EDU is no longer DoD contracter for the IANA function .
ICANN is the current holder of the USG contract for the IANA function .
Many of IANA 's roles were stripped from it and assigned to other entities which makes sense .
Still , it is perhaps among the saddest moments in internet history , that this change happened.. . Good and bad things have come of it .
But do n't think of IANA as a separate entity anymore , it 's really just ICANN .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
ISI.EDU is no longer DoD contracter for the IANA function.
ICANN is the current holder of the USG contract for the IANA function.
Many of IANA's roles were stripped from it and assigned to other entities which makes sense.
Still, it is perhaps among  the saddest moments in internet history, that this change happened...

Good and bad things have come of it.
But don't think of IANA as a separate entity anymore, it's really just ICANN.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884210</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885008</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunately, applications still behind the cu</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264346400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IPv6 Support is in progress for MySQL.  It looks like it's maybe going to be in 5.2 or 6.0 (depending on how you read it).<br>See http://forge.mysql.com/worklog/task.php?id=798</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IPv6 Support is in progress for MySQL .
It looks like it 's maybe going to be in 5.2 or 6.0 ( depending on how you read it ) .See http : //forge.mysql.com/worklog/task.php ? id = 798</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IPv6 Support is in progress for MySQL.
It looks like it's maybe going to be in 5.2 or 6.0 (depending on how you read it).See http://forge.mysql.com/worklog/task.php?id=798</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886486</id>
	<title>Re:Install your own 6to4 tunnel today</title>
	<author>mtxf</author>
	<datestamp>1264358880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hi there,</p><p>What are the variables SLA\_INTF and INTF\_ID supposed to be in your script above?</p><p>Without them it calculates my ipv6 address as: 2002:5e4b:cf23:0000::0000 (from 94.75.207.35) which doesn't look right to me.</p><p>Thanks</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hi there,What are the variables SLA \ _INTF and INTF \ _ID supposed to be in your script above ? Without them it calculates my ipv6 address as : 2002 : 5e4b : cf23 : 0000 : : 0000 ( from 94.75.207.35 ) which does n't look right to me.Thanks</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hi there,What are the variables SLA\_INTF and INTF\_ID supposed to be in your script above?Without them it calculates my ipv6 address as: 2002:5e4b:cf23:0000::0000 (from 94.75.207.35) which doesn't look right to me.Thanks</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883394</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887212</id>
	<title>Re:they should start selling IPadresses like phone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264410420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>00.00.00.02. Damn Roosevelt...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>00.00.00.02 .
Damn Roosevelt.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>00.00.00.02.
Damn Roosevelt...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883524</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883612</id>
	<title>The sky is falling...again?</title>
	<author>clm1970</author>
	<datestamp>1264336740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Not the first time the IPv4 Sky is falling.  CIDR and NAT fixed the first couple of times.

Quite possible there will be a large proliferation of v4 to v6 gateways.  Or other policy changes to prolong the available pool of IPv4.

The "drop dead date" for running out of address space keeps getting pushed out....</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not the first time the IPv4 Sky is falling .
CIDR and NAT fixed the first couple of times .
Quite possible there will be a large proliferation of v4 to v6 gateways .
Or other policy changes to prolong the available pool of IPv4 .
The " drop dead date " for running out of address space keeps getting pushed out... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not the first time the IPv4 Sky is falling.
CIDR and NAT fixed the first couple of times.
Quite possible there will be a large proliferation of v4 to v6 gateways.
Or other policy changes to prolong the available pool of IPv4.
The "drop dead date" for running out of address space keeps getting pushed out....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884288</id>
	<title>Re:they should start selling IPadresses like phone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264341420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And distribute to every host a giant address alias file containing all the idiot's vanity adress?<br>Why not just use dns? It exactly what dns is for.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And distribute to every host a giant address alias file containing all the idiot 's vanity adress ? Why not just use dns ?
It exactly what dns is for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And distribute to every host a giant address alias file containing all the idiot's vanity adress?Why not just use dns?
It exactly what dns is for.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883342</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30888118</id>
	<title>Re:IPv6?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264421580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>All of your points apply equally to IPv6 as to the OP's suggestion, so using them as arguments for why OP's suggestion is bad and IPv6 is better is just lunacy. All he's suggesting is that they should have preserved the existing notation instead of introducing a new format which people have to spend time learning (which is probably a bigger deal for us casual users who don't have to work with this stuff daily - IPv4 is incredibly simple to remember even when you've not done anything with it for 12 months, whereas I'd probably have to go refresh my memory on IPv6 every time).</htmltext>
<tokenext>All of your points apply equally to IPv6 as to the OP 's suggestion , so using them as arguments for why OP 's suggestion is bad and IPv6 is better is just lunacy .
All he 's suggesting is that they should have preserved the existing notation instead of introducing a new format which people have to spend time learning ( which is probably a bigger deal for us casual users who do n't have to work with this stuff daily - IPv4 is incredibly simple to remember even when you 've not done anything with it for 12 months , whereas I 'd probably have to go refresh my memory on IPv6 every time ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All of your points apply equally to IPv6 as to the OP's suggestion, so using them as arguments for why OP's suggestion is bad and IPv6 is better is just lunacy.
All he's suggesting is that they should have preserved the existing notation instead of introducing a new format which people have to spend time learning (which is probably a bigger deal for us casual users who don't have to work with this stuff daily - IPv4 is incredibly simple to remember even when you've not done anything with it for 12 months, whereas I'd probably have to go refresh my memory on IPv6 every time).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885656</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883852</id>
	<title>Re:How's NAT64 coming along?</title>
	<author>paskie</author>
	<datestamp>1264338240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NAT64 actually does not solve that, it concerns only the IPv6-&gt;IPv4 part, not vice versa. A more general mechanism NAT-PT has been proposed at the dawn of IPv6, but its status has been changed to historic by RFC4966 as it turns out that this is not really easy to get right.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NAT64 actually does not solve that , it concerns only the IPv6- &gt; IPv4 part , not vice versa .
A more general mechanism NAT-PT has been proposed at the dawn of IPv6 , but its status has been changed to historic by RFC4966 as it turns out that this is not really easy to get right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NAT64 actually does not solve that, it concerns only the IPv6-&gt;IPv4 part, not vice versa.
A more general mechanism NAT-PT has been proposed at the dawn of IPv6, but its status has been changed to historic by RFC4966 as it turns out that this is not really easy to get right.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883944</id>
	<title>Re:Install your own 6to4 tunnel today</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264338780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Too bad, the anycast 192.88.99.1 sucks ass from so many places.  For me, for example, it's in Switzerland, 60ms ping away (Poland).</p><p>I use SiXXS instead, with 15ms pings.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Too bad , the anycast 192.88.99.1 sucks ass from so many places .
For me , for example , it 's in Switzerland , 60ms ping away ( Poland ) .I use SiXXS instead , with 15ms pings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Too bad, the anycast 192.88.99.1 sucks ass from so many places.
For me, for example, it's in Switzerland, 60ms ping away (Poland).I use SiXXS instead, with 15ms pings.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883394</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883622</id>
	<title>While they're at it...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264336800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I want 1.3.3.7</htmltext>
<tokenext>I want 1.3.3.7</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want 1.3.3.7</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883556</id>
	<title>Enter the IP truthers</title>
	<author>calmofthestorm</author>
	<datestamp>1264336500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>who claim that IP exhaustion is a conspiracy thought up by Al Gore to generate more money for the British Royal Family, and that if we ignore the liberal computer scientists and their biased journals, everything will be fine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>who claim that IP exhaustion is a conspiracy thought up by Al Gore to generate more money for the British Royal Family , and that if we ignore the liberal computer scientists and their biased journals , everything will be fine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>who claim that IP exhaustion is a conspiracy thought up by Al Gore to generate more money for the British Royal Family, and that if we ignore the liberal computer scientists and their biased journals, everything will be fine.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887848</id>
	<title>Re:What about getting back some...</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1264418400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Considering that IBM has more than 380,000 employees, and many many more devices and sub-companies, I think they actually do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering that IBM has more than 380,000 employees , and many many more devices and sub-companies , I think they actually do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering that IBM has more than 380,000 employees, and many many more devices and sub-companies, I think they actually do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883366</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883384</id>
	<title>Routers and IPvx</title>
	<author>hackwrench</author>
	<datestamp>1264335480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The way I understand it, routers still use IPv4. Is it feasable for routers to use IPv6 amongst themselves, freeing their IPv4 addresses for use at endpoints?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The way I understand it , routers still use IPv4 .
Is it feasable for routers to use IPv6 amongst themselves , freeing their IPv4 addresses for use at endpoints ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The way I understand it, routers still use IPv4.
Is it feasable for routers to use IPv6 amongst themselves, freeing their IPv4 addresses for use at endpoints?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883646</id>
	<title>Oops!</title>
	<author>dandart</author>
	<datestamp>1264336920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oops - the house which one of my servers is on uses 1.1.0.0/16 for its internal connection.

<br> <br>I <i>told</i> him to change it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oops - the house which one of my servers is on uses 1.1.0.0/16 for its internal connection .
I told him to change it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oops - the house which one of my servers is on uses 1.1.0.0/16 for its internal connection.
I told him to change it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883796</id>
	<title>Speculators and domain squaters</title>
	<author>Billly Gates</author>
	<datestamp>1264337760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder if speculators and investors are buying up all the IP4 addresses just to resell them at 10x the price. The same speculators that made billions doing this to housing until a bubble formed.</p><p>Or am I just paranoid? I would be tempted myself if I were an evil billionaire.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if speculators and investors are buying up all the IP4 addresses just to resell them at 10x the price .
The same speculators that made billions doing this to housing until a bubble formed.Or am I just paranoid ?
I would be tempted myself if I were an evil billionaire .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if speculators and investors are buying up all the IP4 addresses just to resell them at 10x the price.
The same speculators that made billions doing this to housing until a bubble formed.Or am I just paranoid?
I would be tempted myself if I were an evil billionaire.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884386</id>
	<title>Re:How's NAT64 coming along?</title>
	<author>ScytheBlade1</author>
	<datestamp>1264342140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>While not a fix-all, <a href="http://www.squid-cache.org/" title="squid-cache.org">squid</a> [squid-cache.org] can alleviate most all of the headaches involved with v6  v4 communication when it comes to HTTP (also known as "the internet" by the masses).<br>
<br>
Squid is v4 and v6 aware, which means if you have an IPv6 host using squid, it can talk to an IPv4 host. If you have an IPv4 host, it can now talk to an IPv6 host as well. The only downside here is that it requires configuration of the proxy in the browser directly, you can't (easily, without DNS spoofing) transparently proxy all requests. Fortunately, this is generally not an issue for any business with a competent network admin staff.<br>
<br>
Considering how many networks already deploy squid..</htmltext>
<tokenext>While not a fix-all , squid [ squid-cache.org ] can alleviate most all of the headaches involved with v6 v4 communication when it comes to HTTP ( also known as " the internet " by the masses ) .
Squid is v4 and v6 aware , which means if you have an IPv6 host using squid , it can talk to an IPv4 host .
If you have an IPv4 host , it can now talk to an IPv6 host as well .
The only downside here is that it requires configuration of the proxy in the browser directly , you ca n't ( easily , without DNS spoofing ) transparently proxy all requests .
Fortunately , this is generally not an issue for any business with a competent network admin staff .
Considering how many networks already deploy squid. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While not a fix-all, squid [squid-cache.org] can alleviate most all of the headaches involved with v6  v4 communication when it comes to HTTP (also known as "the internet" by the masses).
Squid is v4 and v6 aware, which means if you have an IPv6 host using squid, it can talk to an IPv4 host.
If you have an IPv4 host, it can now talk to an IPv6 host as well.
The only downside here is that it requires configuration of the proxy in the browser directly, you can't (easily, without DNS spoofing) transparently proxy all requests.
Fortunately, this is generally not an issue for any business with a competent network admin staff.
Considering how many networks already deploy squid..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884054</id>
	<title>Wikipedia checkuser will be useless</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264339620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am a former good faith Wikipedian banned because of checkuser abuse by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:J.delanoy" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">J.delanoy</a> [wikipedia.org] and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dominic" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Dominic</a> [wikipedia.org]. Wikipedia uses a flawed assumption that if you share a popular subnet you must be a sockpuppet of a vandal. With more and more people behind NAT get ready for Wikipedia to ban more of its users due to the flawed checkuser. This is the most annoying example of the shrinking IP addresses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am a former good faith Wikipedian banned because of checkuser abuse by J.delanoy [ wikipedia.org ] and Dominic [ wikipedia.org ] .
Wikipedia uses a flawed assumption that if you share a popular subnet you must be a sockpuppet of a vandal .
With more and more people behind NAT get ready for Wikipedia to ban more of its users due to the flawed checkuser .
This is the most annoying example of the shrinking IP addresses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am a former good faith Wikipedian banned because of checkuser abuse by J.delanoy [wikipedia.org] and Dominic [wikipedia.org].
Wikipedia uses a flawed assumption that if you share a popular subnet you must be a sockpuppet of a vandal.
With more and more people behind NAT get ready for Wikipedia to ban more of its users due to the flawed checkuser.
This is the most annoying example of the shrinking IP addresses.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885350</id>
	<title>Re:AnoNet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264349040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>10.0.0.0/8 is non routable.  Try again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>10.0.0.0/8 is non routable .
Try again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>10.0.0.0/8 is non routable.
Try again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884428</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884372</id>
	<title>Dual stack is NOT the solution.</title>
	<author>Nicolas MONNET</author>
	<datestamp>1264342020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have dual stack at home, natively. For all intents and purposes, IPv6 is useless to me. As a result, support is worse. If it goes down, I don't really notice it, and my ISP doesn't give much of a fuck ("err, use IPv4").</p><p>Furthermore, as long as not everybody has dual stack, everybody suffers from IPv4 address exhaustion. In other words, the dual stack "solution" means that we have to use IPv4 until every single host (or at least every host we need to talk to) has implemented IPv6. In reality, it's clear that 20 years in the future there will still be idiots still running IPv4, because they can't be fucked to migrate. When I see how networking is broken in many enterprises, I don't see how they'll ever migrate to IPv6. I could tell you about all the brokenness I've witnessed, even in companies that are supposed to be somewhat technically oriented, and it's fucking scary.</p><p>Forget dual stack. And don't call it a "solution," it's not just ridiculous, it's delusional.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have dual stack at home , natively .
For all intents and purposes , IPv6 is useless to me .
As a result , support is worse .
If it goes down , I do n't really notice it , and my ISP does n't give much of a fuck ( " err , use IPv4 " ) .Furthermore , as long as not everybody has dual stack , everybody suffers from IPv4 address exhaustion .
In other words , the dual stack " solution " means that we have to use IPv4 until every single host ( or at least every host we need to talk to ) has implemented IPv6 .
In reality , it 's clear that 20 years in the future there will still be idiots still running IPv4 , because they ca n't be fucked to migrate .
When I see how networking is broken in many enterprises , I do n't see how they 'll ever migrate to IPv6 .
I could tell you about all the brokenness I 've witnessed , even in companies that are supposed to be somewhat technically oriented , and it 's fucking scary.Forget dual stack .
And do n't call it a " solution , " it 's not just ridiculous , it 's delusional .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have dual stack at home, natively.
For all intents and purposes, IPv6 is useless to me.
As a result, support is worse.
If it goes down, I don't really notice it, and my ISP doesn't give much of a fuck ("err, use IPv4").Furthermore, as long as not everybody has dual stack, everybody suffers from IPv4 address exhaustion.
In other words, the dual stack "solution" means that we have to use IPv4 until every single host (or at least every host we need to talk to) has implemented IPv6.
In reality, it's clear that 20 years in the future there will still be idiots still running IPv4, because they can't be fucked to migrate.
When I see how networking is broken in many enterprises, I don't see how they'll ever migrate to IPv6.
I could tell you about all the brokenness I've witnessed, even in companies that are supposed to be somewhat technically oriented, and it's fucking scary.Forget dual stack.
And don't call it a "solution," it's not just ridiculous, it's delusional.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883956</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30892476</id>
	<title>Re:Wouldn't more widespread SNI support be nice?</title>
	<author>butlerm</author>
	<datestamp>1264443300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is why the government should pay Microsoft to backport SNI to Windows XP and 2000. Those machines aren't going away any time soon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is why the government should pay Microsoft to backport SNI to Windows XP and 2000 .
Those machines are n't going away any time soon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is why the government should pay Microsoft to backport SNI to Windows XP and 2000.
Those machines aren't going away any time soon.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883440</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887740</id>
	<title>Oh damn...</title>
	<author>TarMil</author>
	<datestamp>1264417320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>My xkcd "Map of the Internet" poster just got outdated.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My xkcd " Map of the Internet " poster just got outdated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My xkcd "Map of the Internet" poster just got outdated.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884210</id>
	<title>Is this a misprint...</title>
	<author>pongo000</author>
	<datestamp>1264340760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...or has ICANN managed to weasel its way into IP allocations?</p><p><i>The major address blocks 1.0.0.0/8 and 27.0.0.0/8, are chosen accordance with a decision by ICANN to assign the least-desirable remaining IP address ranges to the largest regional registries first</i></p><p>I thought <a href="http://www.iana.org/" title="iana.org">IANA</a> [iana.org] was responsible for IP allocations.  Don't tell me ICANN has IANA in its evil grasp as well!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...or has ICANN managed to weasel its way into IP allocations ? The major address blocks 1.0.0.0/8 and 27.0.0.0/8 , are chosen accordance with a decision by ICANN to assign the least-desirable remaining IP address ranges to the largest regional registries firstI thought IANA [ iana.org ] was responsible for IP allocations .
Do n't tell me ICANN has IANA in its evil grasp as well !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...or has ICANN managed to weasel its way into IP allocations?The major address blocks 1.0.0.0/8 and 27.0.0.0/8, are chosen accordance with a decision by ICANN to assign the least-desirable remaining IP address ranges to the largest regional registries firstI thought IANA [iana.org] was responsible for IP allocations.
Don't tell me ICANN has IANA in its evil grasp as well!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30888130</id>
	<title>Re:Install your own 6to4 tunnel today</title>
	<author>raju1kabir</author>
	<datestamp>1264421700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Too bad, the anycast 192.88.99.1 sucks ass from so many places. For me, for example, it's in Switzerland, 60ms ping away (Poland).</p></div></blockquote><p>You think that's bad, I'm in Malaysia and from here it routes to South Africa.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Too bad , the anycast 192.88.99.1 sucks ass from so many places .
For me , for example , it 's in Switzerland , 60ms ping away ( Poland ) .You think that 's bad , I 'm in Malaysia and from here it routes to South Africa .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Too bad, the anycast 192.88.99.1 sucks ass from so many places.
For me, for example, it's in Switzerland, 60ms ping away (Poland).You think that's bad, I'm in Malaysia and from here it routes to South Africa.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883944</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30892482</id>
	<title>Re:Hewlett-Packard</title>
	<author>sylvandb</author>
	<datestamp>1264443300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why does Hewlett-Packard have not one but TWO<nobr> <wbr></nobr><a href="http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/" title="iana.org" rel="nofollow">/8 IPv4 address ranges</a> [iana.org]?</p></div><p>Because HP was around when the 'net was created, and acquired 15./8.</p><p>And because DEC was around when the 'net was created, and acquired 16./8.</p><p>And because Compaq acquired DEC and HP acquired Compaq, leaving HP with 15./8 and 16./8 as well as a bunch of smaller blocks.  (But when HP begat Agilent, while the heart and soul of the company was fractured, HP kept the IP blocks.)</p><p>15./8 used to be directly routable, then that went away but public DNS would still resolve all the internal systems.  Then that went away and only a few internal systems were published in external DNS.  Then that went away and only Mx records remained.</p><p>Strange how this mirrors the physical world...  Someday, when all the physical land has been sold, HP will probably figure out a way to sell virtual land, aka IPv4 addresses.</p><p>sdb -- once at hpbs2024 and linux.boi.hp.com, and also hpdmd48.</p><p>P.S. Remember when hpdmd48 was a UUCP hub?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does Hewlett-Packard have not one but TWO /8 IPv4 address ranges [ iana.org ] ? Because HP was around when the 'net was created , and acquired 15./8.And because DEC was around when the 'net was created , and acquired 16./8.And because Compaq acquired DEC and HP acquired Compaq , leaving HP with 15./8 and 16./8 as well as a bunch of smaller blocks .
( But when HP begat Agilent , while the heart and soul of the company was fractured , HP kept the IP blocks .
) 15./8 used to be directly routable , then that went away but public DNS would still resolve all the internal systems .
Then that went away and only a few internal systems were published in external DNS .
Then that went away and only Mx records remained.Strange how this mirrors the physical world... Someday , when all the physical land has been sold , HP will probably figure out a way to sell virtual land , aka IPv4 addresses.sdb -- once at hpbs2024 and linux.boi.hp.com , and also hpdmd48.P.S .
Remember when hpdmd48 was a UUCP hub ?
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does Hewlett-Packard have not one but TWO /8 IPv4 address ranges [iana.org]?Because HP was around when the 'net was created, and acquired 15./8.And because DEC was around when the 'net was created, and acquired 16./8.And because Compaq acquired DEC and HP acquired Compaq, leaving HP with 15./8 and 16./8 as well as a bunch of smaller blocks.
(But when HP begat Agilent, while the heart and soul of the company was fractured, HP kept the IP blocks.
)15./8 used to be directly routable, then that went away but public DNS would still resolve all the internal systems.
Then that went away and only a few internal systems were published in external DNS.
Then that went away and only Mx records remained.Strange how this mirrors the physical world...  Someday, when all the physical land has been sold, HP will probably figure out a way to sell virtual land, aka IPv4 addresses.sdb -- once at hpbs2024 and linux.boi.hp.com, and also hpdmd48.P.S.
Remember when hpdmd48 was a UUCP hub?
;)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883680</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883810</id>
	<title>Re:Ill bet this will happen</title>
	<author>Dadoo</author>
	<datestamp>1264337880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I actually called my ISP last week and asked if I could get an IPv6 address. They told me Cisco said they won't have to worry about it for at least a couple of years, so they (my ISP) haven't even started thinking about it, yet. I guess they're going to wait until the last IPv4 addresses run out and have a mad rush to assign IPv6 addresses. That'll be fun...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I actually called my ISP last week and asked if I could get an IPv6 address .
They told me Cisco said they wo n't have to worry about it for at least a couple of years , so they ( my ISP ) have n't even started thinking about it , yet .
I guess they 're going to wait until the last IPv4 addresses run out and have a mad rush to assign IPv6 addresses .
That 'll be fun.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I actually called my ISP last week and asked if I could get an IPv6 address.
They told me Cisco said they won't have to worry about it for at least a couple of years, so they (my ISP) haven't even started thinking about it, yet.
I guess they're going to wait until the last IPv4 addresses run out and have a mad rush to assign IPv6 addresses.
That'll be fun...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883276</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883598</id>
	<title>IPv6?</title>
	<author>Midnight Thunder</author>
	<datestamp>1264336680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So still no need to start getting infrastructure ready for IPv6?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So still no need to start getting infrastructure ready for IPv6 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So still no need to start getting infrastructure ready for IPv6?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883972</id>
	<title>Global pain?  Really?</title>
	<author>Jeff DeMaagd</author>
	<datestamp>1264339020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I think of "global pain", I don't think of IP addresses running short, sorry.  It was not on my list and still isn't.  Maybe it's an annoyance or nuisance to certain affected people.  If I don't seem sympathetic, it's because I'm not.  It's a problem that needs to be addressed, but let's not resort to self-discrediting hyperbole.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I think of " global pain " , I do n't think of IP addresses running short , sorry .
It was not on my list and still is n't .
Maybe it 's an annoyance or nuisance to certain affected people .
If I do n't seem sympathetic , it 's because I 'm not .
It 's a problem that needs to be addressed , but let 's not resort to self-discrediting hyperbole .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I think of "global pain", I don't think of IP addresses running short, sorry.
It was not on my list and still isn't.
Maybe it's an annoyance or nuisance to certain affected people.
If I don't seem sympathetic, it's because I'm not.
It's a problem that needs to be addressed, but let's not resort to self-discrediting hyperbole.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883584</id>
	<title>Allocation strategy</title>
	<author>Nofsck Ingcloo</author>
	<datestamp>1264336620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm really ticked about how the allocation of addresses has been handled over the years, and I can't seem to get a reasonable answer as to why the allocation strategy can't be fixed.  How come we can't (pardon the expression) claw back a bunch of allocated but unused addresses from the organizations that are squatting on them?  How come we can't allocate addresses in smaller blocks?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm really ticked about how the allocation of addresses has been handled over the years , and I ca n't seem to get a reasonable answer as to why the allocation strategy ca n't be fixed .
How come we ca n't ( pardon the expression ) claw back a bunch of allocated but unused addresses from the organizations that are squatting on them ?
How come we ca n't allocate addresses in smaller blocks ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm really ticked about how the allocation of addresses has been handled over the years, and I can't seem to get a reasonable answer as to why the allocation strategy can't be fixed.
How come we can't (pardon the expression) claw back a bunch of allocated but unused addresses from the organizations that are squatting on them?
How come we can't allocate addresses in smaller blocks?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883618</id>
	<title>How do these ignorant comments get modded up?</title>
	<author>Abcd1234</author>
	<datestamp>1264336800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This has been addressed time and time (and time) again.  a) Those organizations would have to defrag their IP space before large blocks could get released, a process that's slow, intensive, and expensive.  But more importantly, b) even if they did that, and then release those blocks for reallocation, at the current rate of consumption, it'd buy us, what?  18 months?  Two years at the outside?  Meanwhile, global routing tables would get even *larger*, and they're already gigantic.</p><p>No, reallocating unused IPs is a total fucking waste of time.  That time would be *far* better spent getting IPv6 deployed so we could all move on from this mess.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This has been addressed time and time ( and time ) again .
a ) Those organizations would have to defrag their IP space before large blocks could get released , a process that 's slow , intensive , and expensive .
But more importantly , b ) even if they did that , and then release those blocks for reallocation , at the current rate of consumption , it 'd buy us , what ?
18 months ?
Two years at the outside ?
Meanwhile , global routing tables would get even * larger * , and they 're already gigantic.No , reallocating unused IPs is a total fucking waste of time .
That time would be * far * better spent getting IPv6 deployed so we could all move on from this mess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This has been addressed time and time (and time) again.
a) Those organizations would have to defrag their IP space before large blocks could get released, a process that's slow, intensive, and expensive.
But more importantly, b) even if they did that, and then release those blocks for reallocation, at the current rate of consumption, it'd buy us, what?
18 months?
Two years at the outside?
Meanwhile, global routing tables would get even *larger*, and they're already gigantic.No, reallocating unused IPs is a total fucking waste of time.
That time would be *far* better spent getting IPv6 deployed so we could all move on from this mess.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883366</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30895116</id>
	<title>Re:they should start selling IPadresses like phone</title>
	<author>Luyseyal</author>
	<datestamp>1264411380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Eh, methinks if your parents had 69'd instead, you wouldn't have that birthday...</p><p>-l</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Eh , methinks if your parents had 69 'd instead , you would n't have that birthday...-l</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Eh, methinks if your parents had 69'd instead, you wouldn't have that birthday...-l</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883342</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884966</id>
	<title>Re:Install your own 6to4 tunnel today</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264346100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>sabayonnavi ~ # CUR\_IP=(`ip -4 addr show ${CUR\_DV} | awk '/inet / { print $2 }' | sed -e 's/^\(\([0-9]\{1,3\}\.\)\{3\}[0-9]\{1,3\}\).*$/\1/'`)<br>sabayonnavi ~ # echo $CUR\_IP<br>127.0.0.1<br>sabayonnavi ~ #<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>sabayonnavi ~ # CUR \ _IP = ( ` ip -4 addr show $ { CUR \ _DV } | awk '/inet / { print $ 2 } ' | sed -e 's/ ^ \ ( \ ( [ 0-9 ] \ { 1,3 \ } \ . \ ) \ { 3 \ } [ 0-9 ] \ { 1,3 \ } \ ) .
* $ / \ 1/ ' ` ) sabayonnavi ~ # echo $ CUR \ _IP127.0.0.1sabayonnavi ~ # : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sabayonnavi ~ # CUR\_IP=(`ip -4 addr show ${CUR\_DV} | awk '/inet / { print $2 }' | sed -e 's/^\(\([0-9]\{1,3\}\.\)\{3\}[0-9]\{1,3\}\).
*$/\1/'`)sabayonnavi ~ # echo $CUR\_IP127.0.0.1sabayonnavi ~ # :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883394</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30888236</id>
	<title>Re:AnoNet</title>
	<author>Linker3000</author>
	<datestamp>1264423320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So 127.0.0.1 will resolve to www.clownpenis.fart ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So 127.0.0.1 will resolve to www.clownpenis.fart ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So 127.0.0.1 will resolve to www.clownpenis.fart ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886008</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883432</id>
	<title>Re:Desirable?</title>
	<author>srussia</author>
	<datestamp>1264335840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why are some IP addresses more desirable than others? They are just numbers after all.</p></div><p>Same thing with domain names. They're just letters, after all.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why are some IP addresses more desirable than others ?
They are just numbers after all.Same thing with domain names .
They 're just letters , after all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why are some IP addresses more desirable than others?
They are just numbers after all.Same thing with domain names.
They're just letters, after all.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885130</id>
	<title>Re:What about getting back some...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264347180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I seriously doubt that GE, IBM, AT&amp;T, Xerox, HP, Apple, MIT, Ford, AT&amp;T (again), Halliburton, Bell, Prudential securities, UK government  Department for work and Pensions, Dupont de Nemours and Co., Inc, Merck, USPS and some others deserve or need a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/8.</p></div><p>You actually said MIT... one of the first four on ARPAnet.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I seriously doubt that GE , IBM , AT&amp;T , Xerox , HP , Apple , MIT , Ford , AT&amp;T ( again ) , Halliburton , Bell , Prudential securities , UK government Department for work and Pensions , Dupont de Nemours and Co. , Inc , Merck , USPS and some others deserve or need a /8.You actually said MIT... one of the first four on ARPAnet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I seriously doubt that GE, IBM, AT&amp;T, Xerox, HP, Apple, MIT, Ford, AT&amp;T (again), Halliburton, Bell, Prudential securities, UK government  Department for work and Pensions, Dupont de Nemours and Co., Inc, Merck, USPS and some others deserve or need a /8.You actually said MIT... one of the first four on ARPAnet.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883366</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884952</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunately, applications still behind the cu</title>
	<author>ducomputergeek</author>
	<datestamp>1264345980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the case of MySQL, stop using a toy and start using a REAL database.</p><p><a href="http://www.postgresql.org/about/featuredetail/feature.67" title="postgresql.org">http://www.postgresql.org/about/featuredetail/feature.67</a> [postgresql.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the case of MySQL , stop using a toy and start using a REAL database.http : //www.postgresql.org/about/featuredetail/feature.67 [ postgresql.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the case of MySQL, stop using a toy and start using a REAL database.http://www.postgresql.org/about/featuredetail/feature.67 [postgresql.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884048</id>
	<title>I don't know</title>
	<author>Sycraft-fu</author>
	<datestamp>1264339560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There has been an increasing amount of IPv6 support out there. Part of the problem in terms of going IPv6 right away is that many of the high end routers out there accelerate IPv4 but don't accelerate IPv6. Basically when you deal with large amounts of data, it is infeasible to do everything in software. So you have ASICs to help speed everything up. Works great, but said ASICs have limits to what they can do and being hardware, can't simply be reprogrammed. This means you have to buy new hardware to support IPv6, which is of course expensive.</p><p>We had that situation on the campus I work on a few years ago. Some people were wanting IPv6 but we didn't support it. Technically, it could be enabled and run on the routers' CPUs but that would only work if a few people used it. If usage got higher, the routers would crash under the load. We needed new routers (or more properly new supervisor modules for them) to support it. However, it was really expensive, a few million for all of campus. That money was not going to be spent just so people could play with IPv6.</p><p>However, we've had to upgrade the routers anyhow to support more traffic and such, so now they have IPv6 hardware and IPv6 is routed on campus.</p><p>Thus I think you'll see this continue to happen. New hardware supports IPv6, companies will get it, and will then be able to support IPv6 no problem. It just won't be an immediate process. They aren't going to go and buy IPv6 hardware just to get IPv6 support if they don't need it. However, when they need new hardware anyhow, the stuff they get will have IPv6 support.</p><p>I think we are more likely to see a gradual change. More and more networks will start supporting IPv6, and people will start using it because it'll be cheap. An ISP will say something like "Well sure, you can buy IPv4 addresses for $10/month each, however your account includes more IPv6 addresses than you can ever use for free anyhow." So people will start using it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There has been an increasing amount of IPv6 support out there .
Part of the problem in terms of going IPv6 right away is that many of the high end routers out there accelerate IPv4 but do n't accelerate IPv6 .
Basically when you deal with large amounts of data , it is infeasible to do everything in software .
So you have ASICs to help speed everything up .
Works great , but said ASICs have limits to what they can do and being hardware , ca n't simply be reprogrammed .
This means you have to buy new hardware to support IPv6 , which is of course expensive.We had that situation on the campus I work on a few years ago .
Some people were wanting IPv6 but we did n't support it .
Technically , it could be enabled and run on the routers ' CPUs but that would only work if a few people used it .
If usage got higher , the routers would crash under the load .
We needed new routers ( or more properly new supervisor modules for them ) to support it .
However , it was really expensive , a few million for all of campus .
That money was not going to be spent just so people could play with IPv6.However , we 've had to upgrade the routers anyhow to support more traffic and such , so now they have IPv6 hardware and IPv6 is routed on campus.Thus I think you 'll see this continue to happen .
New hardware supports IPv6 , companies will get it , and will then be able to support IPv6 no problem .
It just wo n't be an immediate process .
They are n't going to go and buy IPv6 hardware just to get IPv6 support if they do n't need it .
However , when they need new hardware anyhow , the stuff they get will have IPv6 support.I think we are more likely to see a gradual change .
More and more networks will start supporting IPv6 , and people will start using it because it 'll be cheap .
An ISP will say something like " Well sure , you can buy IPv4 addresses for $ 10/month each , however your account includes more IPv6 addresses than you can ever use for free anyhow .
" So people will start using it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There has been an increasing amount of IPv6 support out there.
Part of the problem in terms of going IPv6 right away is that many of the high end routers out there accelerate IPv4 but don't accelerate IPv6.
Basically when you deal with large amounts of data, it is infeasible to do everything in software.
So you have ASICs to help speed everything up.
Works great, but said ASICs have limits to what they can do and being hardware, can't simply be reprogrammed.
This means you have to buy new hardware to support IPv6, which is of course expensive.We had that situation on the campus I work on a few years ago.
Some people were wanting IPv6 but we didn't support it.
Technically, it could be enabled and run on the routers' CPUs but that would only work if a few people used it.
If usage got higher, the routers would crash under the load.
We needed new routers (or more properly new supervisor modules for them) to support it.
However, it was really expensive, a few million for all of campus.
That money was not going to be spent just so people could play with IPv6.However, we've had to upgrade the routers anyhow to support more traffic and such, so now they have IPv6 hardware and IPv6 is routed on campus.Thus I think you'll see this continue to happen.
New hardware supports IPv6, companies will get it, and will then be able to support IPv6 no problem.
It just won't be an immediate process.
They aren't going to go and buy IPv6 hardware just to get IPv6 support if they don't need it.
However, when they need new hardware anyhow, the stuff they get will have IPv6 support.I think we are more likely to see a gradual change.
More and more networks will start supporting IPv6, and people will start using it because it'll be cheap.
An ISP will say something like "Well sure, you can buy IPv4 addresses for $10/month each, however your account includes more IPv6 addresses than you can ever use for free anyhow.
" So people will start using it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883276</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30893640</id>
	<title>There's an easier solution...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264448100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Rescind/revoke all address blocks for China.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Rescind/revoke all address blocks for China .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rescind/revoke all address blocks for China.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30888840</id>
	<title>Re:AnoNet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264429380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And if they got rid of this and other useless blocks of IP's we would have more freebies...</p><p>Do we really need 16.7 Million IP's for localhost? (127.X.X.X)<br>Do we really need the same for private networks(10.X.X.X)<br>Same goes for 192.168.X.X and 172.16.X.X which are 65,536<br>And the useless 169.254.X.X block</p><p>Really, the 10. block is more then enough for all internal networks, and even overkill.</p><p>Make localhost 0.0.0.0, or assign it ONE IP only.<br>Choose one block of IP's for internal networks, not three...</p><p>And computers/servers that do not need connectivity to the outside world should be natted with internal IP's, not assigned IP's from the public IP space.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And if they got rid of this and other useless blocks of IP 's we would have more freebies...Do we really need 16.7 Million IP 's for localhost ?
( 127.X.X.X ) Do we really need the same for private networks ( 10.X.X.X ) Same goes for 192.168.X.X and 172.16.X.X which are 65,536And the useless 169.254.X.X blockReally , the 10. block is more then enough for all internal networks , and even overkill.Make localhost 0.0.0.0 , or assign it ONE IP only.Choose one block of IP 's for internal networks , not three...And computers/servers that do not need connectivity to the outside world should be natted with internal IP 's , not assigned IP 's from the public IP space .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And if they got rid of this and other useless blocks of IP's we would have more freebies...Do we really need 16.7 Million IP's for localhost?
(127.X.X.X)Do we really need the same for private networks(10.X.X.X)Same goes for 192.168.X.X and 172.16.X.X which are 65,536And the useless 169.254.X.X blockReally, the 10. block is more then enough for all internal networks, and even overkill.Make localhost 0.0.0.0, or assign it ONE IP only.Choose one block of IP's for internal networks, not three...And computers/servers that do not need connectivity to the outside world should be natted with internal IP's, not assigned IP's from the public IP space.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886008</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884126</id>
	<title>Re:Allocation strategy</title>
	<author>Abcd1234</author>
	<datestamp>1264340040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because the time involved in getting those networks defragmented so contiguous blocks could be excised, after, of course, the lengthly legal battles as organizations rightly fight the extremely expensive move, would be better spent actually fixing the problem (v6) rather than patching it for 18 or 24 months.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because the time involved in getting those networks defragmented so contiguous blocks could be excised , after , of course , the lengthly legal battles as organizations rightly fight the extremely expensive move , would be better spent actually fixing the problem ( v6 ) rather than patching it for 18 or 24 months .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because the time involved in getting those networks defragmented so contiguous blocks could be excised, after, of course, the lengthly legal battles as organizations rightly fight the extremely expensive move, would be better spent actually fixing the problem (v6) rather than patching it for 18 or 24 months.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883584</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30888242</id>
	<title>Re:How's NAT64 coming along?</title>
	<author>davros-too</author>
	<datestamp>1264423380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>nobody wants an ipv6 address -- because all websites are on ipv4 -- because there is no demand for websites to be on ipv6 -- so nobody wants an ipv6 address<p>

Also, FFS could someone write some simple and easy to implement deployment guides for common website configurations like LAMP, IIs6/asp.net, etc. Right now I have to read the technical specifications and figure it out - no way I have time for that!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>nobody wants an ipv6 address -- because all websites are on ipv4 -- because there is no demand for websites to be on ipv6 -- so nobody wants an ipv6 address Also , FFS could someone write some simple and easy to implement deployment guides for common website configurations like LAMP , IIs6/asp.net , etc .
Right now I have to read the technical specifications and figure it out - no way I have time for that !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>nobody wants an ipv6 address -- because all websites are on ipv4 -- because there is no demand for websites to be on ipv6 -- so nobody wants an ipv6 address

Also, FFS could someone write some simple and easy to implement deployment guides for common website configurations like LAMP, IIs6/asp.net, etc.
Right now I have to read the technical specifications and figure it out - no way I have time for that!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885526</id>
	<title>The end of the world!</title>
	<author>toblun</author>
	<datestamp>1264350720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Am I the only one that can see the connection?<br>"which has continuously and reliably estimated global pool IP address exhaustion for late 2011 and regional registry exhaustion by late 2012"<br>The Maya Calender ends 2012 a coincidence I think not!<br>They have foreseen the end of  IPv4 address space.<br>It's the beginning of the end.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Am I the only one that can see the connection ?
" which has continuously and reliably estimated global pool IP address exhaustion for late 2011 and regional registry exhaustion by late 2012 " The Maya Calender ends 2012 a coincidence I think not ! They have foreseen the end of IPv4 address space.It 's the beginning of the end .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Am I the only one that can see the connection?
"which has continuously and reliably estimated global pool IP address exhaustion for late 2011 and regional registry exhaustion by late 2012"The Maya Calender ends 2012 a coincidence I think not!They have foreseen the end of  IPv4 address space.It's the beginning of the end.
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883788</id>
	<title>Re:Ill bet this will happen</title>
	<author>Jarik C-Bol</author>
	<datestamp>1264337700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>your right, because if we had been thinking ahead at all, we would have fully switched to IPv6 by now. personally, I'm surprised we 're not having a new Y2K-esque freak-out over this already. (heck, more effort was put into the digital TV switch than seems to be going into IPv6 switch).</htmltext>
<tokenext>your right , because if we had been thinking ahead at all , we would have fully switched to IPv6 by now .
personally , I 'm surprised we 're not having a new Y2K-esque freak-out over this already .
( heck , more effort was put into the digital TV switch than seems to be going into IPv6 switch ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>your right, because if we had been thinking ahead at all, we would have fully switched to IPv6 by now.
personally, I'm surprised we 're not having a new Y2K-esque freak-out over this already.
(heck, more effort was put into the digital TV switch than seems to be going into IPv6 switch).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883276</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885602</id>
	<title>er</title>
	<author>Idimmu Xul</author>
	<datestamp>1264351260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>In other words: of the 256 major networks in IPv4, only 24 network blocks remain unallocated in the global free pool</p></div></blockquote><p>I thought there were only 126 Class A networks, 1.0.0.0/8 - 126.0.0.0/8, and as there are 16,384 Class B networks, where does this <b>256 major networks</b> come from?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In other words : of the 256 major networks in IPv4 , only 24 network blocks remain unallocated in the global free poolI thought there were only 126 Class A networks , 1.0.0.0/8 - 126.0.0.0/8 , and as there are 16,384 Class B networks , where does this 256 major networks come from ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In other words: of the 256 major networks in IPv4, only 24 network blocks remain unallocated in the global free poolI thought there were only 126 Class A networks, 1.0.0.0/8 - 126.0.0.0/8, and as there are 16,384 Class B networks, where does this 256 major networks come from?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885342</id>
	<title>1.* to APNIC?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264348980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"A total of 16,777,216 IP address numbers were just allocated to the Asian Pacific Network Information Centre IP address registry for assignment to users"</p><p>Oh, that's good to know.  Now I don't have to bother looking up the registrar for all of those hacking attempt logs on my Linux server.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" A total of 16,777,216 IP address numbers were just allocated to the Asian Pacific Network Information Centre IP address registry for assignment to users " Oh , that 's good to know .
Now I do n't have to bother looking up the registrar for all of those hacking attempt logs on my Linux server .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"A total of 16,777,216 IP address numbers were just allocated to the Asian Pacific Network Information Centre IP address registry for assignment to users"Oh, that's good to know.
Now I don't have to bother looking up the registrar for all of those hacking attempt logs on my Linux server.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887222</id>
	<title>Catch 22</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264410480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dual stack creates a catch 22.  What is the point while we have enough ipv4s.  We can't use it when we run out.  To address this currently on the table are: NAT64 (not the deprecated NAT-PT) and dual-stack lite.</p><p>NAT64 is for pure ipv6 clients and when talking to a client with only v4 connectivity it NATs them into ipv6 space.  This is deployed somewhere in China already, and there are ieft drafts busily sort out the general case details.  That nasty part is that it requires DNS64 to work which tends to get in the way of DNSSEC but otherwise it seems to work fairly well.</p><p>Dual-stack lite is the other possible solution on the table.  This again assigns only ipv6 address to the customer.  But there is also a 4 in 6 tunnel to an ipv4 NATTing firewall that will remember both your ipv4 RFC1918 private address and ipv6 address the packet was tunnel in from.</p><p>Both of these require scary NATs across multiple customers an ipv6 address as input.  But at least they gets ipv6 to consumers.</p><p>The very scary transition scenario is scary NAT across multiple customers with no ipv6 addresses to escape with.</p><p>Today most interesting servers have real v6 options already and are staying v4 because there are a lot of horrible or broken ipv6 setups today.  I get routed to  Europe from San Francisco when I use 6to4 or Toredo tunnels,  and my ping times to google go from 20ms to 170ms, and there are much worse setups out there.</p><p>It is the new clients going v6 because they have no choice that is going to drive v6.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dual stack creates a catch 22 .
What is the point while we have enough ipv4s .
We ca n't use it when we run out .
To address this currently on the table are : NAT64 ( not the deprecated NAT-PT ) and dual-stack lite.NAT64 is for pure ipv6 clients and when talking to a client with only v4 connectivity it NATs them into ipv6 space .
This is deployed somewhere in China already , and there are ieft drafts busily sort out the general case details .
That nasty part is that it requires DNS64 to work which tends to get in the way of DNSSEC but otherwise it seems to work fairly well.Dual-stack lite is the other possible solution on the table .
This again assigns only ipv6 address to the customer .
But there is also a 4 in 6 tunnel to an ipv4 NATTing firewall that will remember both your ipv4 RFC1918 private address and ipv6 address the packet was tunnel in from.Both of these require scary NATs across multiple customers an ipv6 address as input .
But at least they gets ipv6 to consumers.The very scary transition scenario is scary NAT across multiple customers with no ipv6 addresses to escape with.Today most interesting servers have real v6 options already and are staying v4 because there are a lot of horrible or broken ipv6 setups today .
I get routed to Europe from San Francisco when I use 6to4 or Toredo tunnels , and my ping times to google go from 20ms to 170ms , and there are much worse setups out there.It is the new clients going v6 because they have no choice that is going to drive v6 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dual stack creates a catch 22.
What is the point while we have enough ipv4s.
We can't use it when we run out.
To address this currently on the table are: NAT64 (not the deprecated NAT-PT) and dual-stack lite.NAT64 is for pure ipv6 clients and when talking to a client with only v4 connectivity it NATs them into ipv6 space.
This is deployed somewhere in China already, and there are ieft drafts busily sort out the general case details.
That nasty part is that it requires DNS64 to work which tends to get in the way of DNSSEC but otherwise it seems to work fairly well.Dual-stack lite is the other possible solution on the table.
This again assigns only ipv6 address to the customer.
But there is also a 4 in 6 tunnel to an ipv4 NATTing firewall that will remember both your ipv4 RFC1918 private address and ipv6 address the packet was tunnel in from.Both of these require scary NATs across multiple customers an ipv6 address as input.
But at least they gets ipv6 to consumers.The very scary transition scenario is scary NAT across multiple customers with no ipv6 addresses to escape with.Today most interesting servers have real v6 options already and are staying v4 because there are a lot of horrible or broken ipv6 setups today.
I get routed to  Europe from San Francisco when I use 6to4 or Toredo tunnels,  and my ping times to google go from 20ms to 170ms, and there are much worse setups out there.It is the new clients going v6 because they have no choice that is going to drive v6.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883956</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884600</id>
	<title>Re:Ill bet this will happen</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264343760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> As a side curiosity, I wonder how many public IPv4 IPs are actually in use.</p></div><p>~$ nmap -sP 0.0.0.0/0</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a side curiosity , I wonder how many public IPv4 IPs are actually in use. ~ $ nmap -sP 0.0.0.0/0</tokentext>
<sentencetext> As a side curiosity, I wonder how many public IPv4 IPs are actually in use.~$ nmap -sP 0.0.0.0/0
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883276</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30901204</id>
	<title>Re:Ill bet this will happen</title>
	<author>LongearedBat</author>
	<datestamp>1264537920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm surprised we 're not having a new Y2K-esque freak-out over this already.</p></div><p><div class="quote"><p> the IPv4 report, which has continuously and reliably estimated global pool IP address exhaustion for late 2011 and regional registry exhaustion by late 2012</p></div><p>
Forget the Y2K bug.  At the end of 2012 the internet will crash, societies will collapse.  The Mayans were right after all!<br>
<br>
(Though on a serious note, I do agree with you.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm surprised we 're not having a new Y2K-esque freak-out over this already .
the IPv4 report , which has continuously and reliably estimated global pool IP address exhaustion for late 2011 and regional registry exhaustion by late 2012 Forget the Y2K bug .
At the end of 2012 the internet will crash , societies will collapse .
The Mayans were right after all !
( Though on a serious note , I do agree with you .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm surprised we 're not having a new Y2K-esque freak-out over this already.
the IPv4 report, which has continuously and reliably estimated global pool IP address exhaustion for late 2011 and regional registry exhaustion by late 2012
Forget the Y2K bug.
At the end of 2012 the internet will crash, societies will collapse.
The Mayans were right after all!
(Though on a serious note, I do agree with you.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883788</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883930</id>
	<title>Re:131.0.0.0</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264338780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NevadaNet, from UNR/UNLV in Reno/Las Vegas, use 131.216.0.0/16. Good thing no one there needs any of those services (they also service the local colleges, state entities and all in all some 100+ sites in Nevada).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NevadaNet , from UNR/UNLV in Reno/Las Vegas , use 131.216.0.0/16 .
Good thing no one there needs any of those services ( they also service the local colleges , state entities and all in all some 100 + sites in Nevada ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NevadaNet, from UNR/UNLV in Reno/Las Vegas, use 131.216.0.0/16.
Good thing no one there needs any of those services (they also service the local colleges, state entities and all in all some 100+ sites in Nevada).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883806</id>
	<title>reclaim dead ip space first</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264337880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ARIN is totally incompetent; Not only does the Prudential have a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/8, but back in 1992 when I worked at the Prudential Bank in Atlanta, that totally separate division applied for and got a class-B (158.221) and still holds it to this day. The ridiculous thing is that they will never use it, never did and when I tried to get ARIN to look into getting it back in the late 1990s, that fell on deaf ears. In fact, the Prudential Bank doesn't even exist anymore at the address in the registry entry for 158.221; I don't know if they even exist at all anymore. Go and reclaim dead IP space, and then see what is left.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ARIN is totally incompetent ; Not only does the Prudential have a /8 , but back in 1992 when I worked at the Prudential Bank in Atlanta , that totally separate division applied for and got a class-B ( 158.221 ) and still holds it to this day .
The ridiculous thing is that they will never use it , never did and when I tried to get ARIN to look into getting it back in the late 1990s , that fell on deaf ears .
In fact , the Prudential Bank does n't even exist anymore at the address in the registry entry for 158.221 ; I do n't know if they even exist at all anymore .
Go and reclaim dead IP space , and then see what is left .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ARIN is totally incompetent; Not only does the Prudential have a /8, but back in 1992 when I worked at the Prudential Bank in Atlanta, that totally separate division applied for and got a class-B (158.221) and still holds it to this day.
The ridiculous thing is that they will never use it, never did and when I tried to get ARIN to look into getting it back in the late 1990s, that fell on deaf ears.
In fact, the Prudential Bank doesn't even exist anymore at the address in the registry entry for 158.221; I don't know if they even exist at all anymore.
Go and reclaim dead IP space, and then see what is left.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883770</id>
	<title>Re:Oh well...</title>
	<author>/dev/trash</author>
	<datestamp>1264337640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I used to use 10.x.x.x for my internal network, until it started to get routed.  Appears some ISPs use it for things.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to use 10.x.x.x for my internal network , until it started to get routed .
Appears some ISPs use it for things .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used to use 10.x.x.x for my internal network, until it started to get routed.
Appears some ISPs use it for things.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884272</id>
	<title>Re:How's NAT64 coming along?</title>
	<author>ObsessiveMathsFreak</author>
	<datestamp>1264341300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>It's so obvious, I find it shocking it's not taken into account more seriously.</p></div></blockquote><p>Our present situation is due in large part to the incompetence of the IPv6 designers and their total and complete failure to plan, or even recognise the need, for a transition.</p><p>The IPv4 address space could have been embedded in the IPv6 space. If the existing standard couldn't handle it, then that standard needed to be changed so it could have. IPv6 machines needed native capability to talk to IPv4 devices. Their lack of it is a damning indictment of the design team and puts a serious question mark over their ability to design adequate technologies.</p><p>A lesser problem, but still an important one, was the current IPv6 address naming system. The addresses are inherently long, but no serious effort was made to mitigate this. A complex and self contradicting set of "shortcuts" was the extend to which the designers went to try and mollify a problem they knew was coming, but largely ignored anyway. It will fall to third parties to design the neccessary conversion tools and standards that network engineers around the world will need to use IPv6 in daily practice. Again, a clear sign of incompetence.</p><p>5 years ago, when IPv6 adoption rates were recognised as a problem, the designers should have taken steps to make the transition smoother. They didn't bother to do that. As a result, IPv6 in its current form can never be used to make the smooth transition that is required. Instead, we will have a painful and troublesome upgrade process which will give headaches and interoperability problems for the next 40 years, if not simply forever.</p><p>This problem will never go away. Once IPv4 runs out completely, there will be a mess of an internet with NAT in places and misconfiguration or conflicting IPv4/IPv6 capable clients with two addresses each all desperately trying to send messages to one another over the tangled knots and wires of madness that the internet will have become. Only reliance on the end to end principle will prevent total and utter meltdown.</p><p>It's going to be nasty, and we're all going to have to get used to it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's so obvious , I find it shocking it 's not taken into account more seriously.Our present situation is due in large part to the incompetence of the IPv6 designers and their total and complete failure to plan , or even recognise the need , for a transition.The IPv4 address space could have been embedded in the IPv6 space .
If the existing standard could n't handle it , then that standard needed to be changed so it could have .
IPv6 machines needed native capability to talk to IPv4 devices .
Their lack of it is a damning indictment of the design team and puts a serious question mark over their ability to design adequate technologies.A lesser problem , but still an important one , was the current IPv6 address naming system .
The addresses are inherently long , but no serious effort was made to mitigate this .
A complex and self contradicting set of " shortcuts " was the extend to which the designers went to try and mollify a problem they knew was coming , but largely ignored anyway .
It will fall to third parties to design the neccessary conversion tools and standards that network engineers around the world will need to use IPv6 in daily practice .
Again , a clear sign of incompetence.5 years ago , when IPv6 adoption rates were recognised as a problem , the designers should have taken steps to make the transition smoother .
They did n't bother to do that .
As a result , IPv6 in its current form can never be used to make the smooth transition that is required .
Instead , we will have a painful and troublesome upgrade process which will give headaches and interoperability problems for the next 40 years , if not simply forever.This problem will never go away .
Once IPv4 runs out completely , there will be a mess of an internet with NAT in places and misconfiguration or conflicting IPv4/IPv6 capable clients with two addresses each all desperately trying to send messages to one another over the tangled knots and wires of madness that the internet will have become .
Only reliance on the end to end principle will prevent total and utter meltdown.It 's going to be nasty , and we 're all going to have to get used to it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's so obvious, I find it shocking it's not taken into account more seriously.Our present situation is due in large part to the incompetence of the IPv6 designers and their total and complete failure to plan, or even recognise the need, for a transition.The IPv4 address space could have been embedded in the IPv6 space.
If the existing standard couldn't handle it, then that standard needed to be changed so it could have.
IPv6 machines needed native capability to talk to IPv4 devices.
Their lack of it is a damning indictment of the design team and puts a serious question mark over their ability to design adequate technologies.A lesser problem, but still an important one, was the current IPv6 address naming system.
The addresses are inherently long, but no serious effort was made to mitigate this.
A complex and self contradicting set of "shortcuts" was the extend to which the designers went to try and mollify a problem they knew was coming, but largely ignored anyway.
It will fall to third parties to design the neccessary conversion tools and standards that network engineers around the world will need to use IPv6 in daily practice.
Again, a clear sign of incompetence.5 years ago, when IPv6 adoption rates were recognised as a problem, the designers should have taken steps to make the transition smoother.
They didn't bother to do that.
As a result, IPv6 in its current form can never be used to make the smooth transition that is required.
Instead, we will have a painful and troublesome upgrade process which will give headaches and interoperability problems for the next 40 years, if not simply forever.This problem will never go away.
Once IPv4 runs out completely, there will be a mess of an internet with NAT in places and misconfiguration or conflicting IPv4/IPv6 capable clients with two addresses each all desperately trying to send messages to one another over the tangled knots and wires of madness that the internet will have become.
Only reliance on the end to end principle will prevent total and utter meltdown.It's going to be nasty, and we're all going to have to get used to it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883954</id>
	<title>Re:Hewlett-Packard</title>
	<author>Tridus</author>
	<datestamp>1264338840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This same issue has already been raised three times in this same post.</p><p>It'd be neat if people actually read a few comments.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This same issue has already been raised three times in this same post.It 'd be neat if people actually read a few comments .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This same issue has already been raised three times in this same post.It'd be neat if people actually read a few comments.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883680</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883370</id>
	<title>audits...</title>
	<author>irving47</author>
	<datestamp>1264335360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess it's ICANN or ARIN that forces audits and demands accountability of usage of address space. Who are some of the big targets for recovery? Apple should be target numero uno with the entire 17.x.x.x class A. I know my college used a lot of 143.88.x.x as live ip's for every work station and wifi-connected laptop that happened to come along. No, that's not a lot, but just an example of the waste that goes on.<br>(Now i'm going to be flamed by the "NAT is just a crappy hack/workaround" crowd.) Oh well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess it 's ICANN or ARIN that forces audits and demands accountability of usage of address space .
Who are some of the big targets for recovery ?
Apple should be target numero uno with the entire 17.x.x.x class A. I know my college used a lot of 143.88.x.x as live ip 's for every work station and wifi-connected laptop that happened to come along .
No , that 's not a lot , but just an example of the waste that goes on .
( Now i 'm going to be flamed by the " NAT is just a crappy hack/workaround " crowd .
) Oh well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess it's ICANN or ARIN that forces audits and demands accountability of usage of address space.
Who are some of the big targets for recovery?
Apple should be target numero uno with the entire 17.x.x.x class A. I know my college used a lot of 143.88.x.x as live ip's for every work station and wifi-connected laptop that happened to come along.
No, that's not a lot, but just an example of the waste that goes on.
(Now i'm going to be flamed by the "NAT is just a crappy hack/workaround" crowd.
) Oh well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883816</id>
	<title>Re:Not using any bogons over here</title>
	<author>/dev/trash</author>
	<datestamp>1264337880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, I had to switch to 192.168. once my ISP started to use 10.x.x.x a few years ago.  Sucked.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , I had to switch to 192.168. once my ISP started to use 10.x.x.x a few years ago .
Sucked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, I had to switch to 192.168. once my ISP started to use 10.x.x.x a few years ago.
Sucked.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885198</id>
	<title>Re:Routers and IPvx</title>
	<author>metamatic</author>
	<datestamp>1264347660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you mean the Internet backbone... Yes, it's possible to encapsulate IPv4 and route it across an IPv6-only backbone by making the routers at both ends handle 4to6. Some Asian ISPs have tried it.</p><p>However, in practice it's not the growth in new backbone connections and backbone routers that's exhausting the IPv4 address space; it's all the new client devices.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you mean the Internet backbone... Yes , it 's possible to encapsulate IPv4 and route it across an IPv6-only backbone by making the routers at both ends handle 4to6 .
Some Asian ISPs have tried it.However , in practice it 's not the growth in new backbone connections and backbone routers that 's exhausting the IPv4 address space ; it 's all the new client devices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you mean the Internet backbone... Yes, it's possible to encapsulate IPv4 and route it across an IPv6-only backbone by making the routers at both ends handle 4to6.
Some Asian ISPs have tried it.However, in practice it's not the growth in new backbone connections and backbone routers that's exhausting the IPv4 address space; it's all the new client devices.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883384</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884542</id>
	<title>Peak IP Myth</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264343460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh dear.  I thought Peak IP was just a myth!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh dear .
I thought Peak IP was just a myth !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh dear.
I thought Peak IP was just a myth!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884282</id>
	<title>Re:What about getting back some...</title>
	<author>WolfWalker545</author>
	<datestamp>1264341420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>GE had at least two<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/8's when I worked for them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>GE had at least two /8 's when I worked for them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>GE had at least two /8's when I worked for them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883366</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883552</id>
	<title>Multicast/Class E</title>
	<author>argent</author>
	<datestamp>1264336500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about the Class E (reserved for future use) range? That's another 15 "Class A" blocks excluding RFC0919.</p><p>How many people use anything but 224/8 for Multicast applications? <a href="http://www.iana.org/assignments/multicast-addresses/" title="iana.org">IANA</a> [iana.org] seems to have most of that space reserved or experimental.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about the Class E ( reserved for future use ) range ?
That 's another 15 " Class A " blocks excluding RFC0919.How many people use anything but 224/8 for Multicast applications ?
IANA [ iana.org ] seems to have most of that space reserved or experimental .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about the Class E (reserved for future use) range?
That's another 15 "Class A" blocks excluding RFC0919.How many people use anything but 224/8 for Multicast applications?
IANA [iana.org] seems to have most of that space reserved or experimental.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883394</id>
	<title>Install your own 6to4 tunnel today</title>
	<author>bbn</author>
	<datestamp>1264335600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Run this script to get your own IPv6 address today:</p><p><tt><br>CUR\_IP=(`ip -4 addr show ${CUR\_DV} | awk '/inet / { print $2 }' | sed -e 's/^\(\([0-9]\{1,3\}\.\)\{3\}[0-9]\{1,3\}\).*$/\1/'`)<br>IPV6\_ADDR=$(printf "2002:\%02x\%02x:\%02x\%02x:\%04x::\%04x" $(echo "${CUR\_IP} ${SLA\_INTF} ${INTF\_ID}" | tr '.' ' '))</tt></p><p><tt>ip tunnel add tun6to4 mode sit remote any local ${CUR\_IP}<br>ip link set dev tun6to4 up<br>ip -6 addr add ${IPV6\_ADDR}/64 dev tun6to4<br>ip -6 route add 2002::/16 dev tun6to4<br>ip -6 route add<nobr> <wbr></nobr>::/0 via<nobr> <wbr></nobr>::192.88.99.1 dev tun6to4 metric 1<br></tt></p><p>Install radvd if you want to share your new IPv6 subnet with other people on your local network.</p><p>This is all it takes. You do not need to wait for your ISP to get a clue.</p><p>Only problem is this does not work with NAT.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Run this script to get your own IPv6 address today : CUR \ _IP = ( ` ip -4 addr show $ { CUR \ _DV } | awk '/inet / { print $ 2 } ' | sed -e 's/ ^ \ ( \ ( [ 0-9 ] \ { 1,3 \ } \ . \ ) \ { 3 \ } [ 0-9 ] \ { 1,3 \ } \ ) .
* $ / \ 1/ ' ` ) IPV6 \ _ADDR = $ ( printf " 2002 : \ % 02x \ % 02x : \ % 02x \ % 02x : \ % 04x : : \ % 04x " $ ( echo " $ { CUR \ _IP } $ { SLA \ _INTF } $ { INTF \ _ID } " | tr ' .
' ' ' ) ) ip tunnel add tun6to4 mode sit remote any local $ { CUR \ _IP } ip link set dev tun6to4 upip -6 addr add $ { IPV6 \ _ADDR } /64 dev tun6to4ip -6 route add 2002 : : /16 dev tun6to4ip -6 route add : : /0 via : : 192.88.99.1 dev tun6to4 metric 1Install radvd if you want to share your new IPv6 subnet with other people on your local network.This is all it takes .
You do not need to wait for your ISP to get a clue.Only problem is this does not work with NAT .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Run this script to get your own IPv6 address today:CUR\_IP=(`ip -4 addr show ${CUR\_DV} | awk '/inet / { print $2 }' | sed -e 's/^\(\([0-9]\{1,3\}\.\)\{3\}[0-9]\{1,3\}\).
*$/\1/'`)IPV6\_ADDR=$(printf "2002:\%02x\%02x:\%02x\%02x:\%04x::\%04x" $(echo "${CUR\_IP} ${SLA\_INTF} ${INTF\_ID}" | tr '.
' ' '))ip tunnel add tun6to4 mode sit remote any local ${CUR\_IP}ip link set dev tun6to4 upip -6 addr add ${IPV6\_ADDR}/64 dev tun6to4ip -6 route add 2002::/16 dev tun6to4ip -6 route add ::/0 via ::192.88.99.1 dev tun6to4 metric 1Install radvd if you want to share your new IPv6 subnet with other people on your local network.This is all it takes.
You do not need to wait for your ISP to get a clue.Only problem is this does not work with NAT.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884566</id>
	<title>L33T</title>
	<author>Shadow\_139</author>
	<datestamp>1264343520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd love to have 1.3.3.7 as my permanent IP address.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd love to have 1.3.3.7 as my permanent IP address .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd love to have 1.3.3.7 as my permanent IP address.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30889060</id>
	<title>Re:AnoNet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264430820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You'll know IPV4 really ran out of space once they sell of 127.0.0.1 though...</p></div><p>Too late - I've already got that one...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 'll know IPV4 really ran out of space once they sell of 127.0.0.1 though...Too late - I 've already got that one.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You'll know IPV4 really ran out of space once they sell of 127.0.0.1 though...Too late - I've already got that one...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886008</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30888308</id>
	<title>Re:Ill bet this will happen</title>
	<author>iritant</author>
	<datestamp>1264424220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know who in Cisco your SP has been speaking with, but even within Cisco opinions vary.  What we would probably all agree, however, is that people should pay attention to what is going on with v4 run-out, and particularly service providers, whose very growth has been tied to their unhindered ability to get address space.</p><p>How customers should react, however, is a far more complex matter that requires thoughtful consideration.</p><p>(not speaking for Cisco but myself).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know who in Cisco your SP has been speaking with , but even within Cisco opinions vary .
What we would probably all agree , however , is that people should pay attention to what is going on with v4 run-out , and particularly service providers , whose very growth has been tied to their unhindered ability to get address space.How customers should react , however , is a far more complex matter that requires thoughtful consideration .
( not speaking for Cisco but myself ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know who in Cisco your SP has been speaking with, but even within Cisco opinions vary.
What we would probably all agree, however, is that people should pay attention to what is going on with v4 run-out, and particularly service providers, whose very growth has been tied to their unhindered ability to get address space.How customers should react, however, is a far more complex matter that requires thoughtful consideration.
(not speaking for Cisco but myself).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883810</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884776</id>
	<title>Training documentation.</title>
	<author>anti-NAT</author>
	<datestamp>1264344840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>131/8 was used in one or a few books or TCP/IP training courses. I can't remember which, I think it might have been Novell's TCP/IP course.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>131/8 was used in one or a few books or TCP/IP training courses .
I ca n't remember which , I think it might have been Novell 's TCP/IP course .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>131/8 was used in one or a few books or TCP/IP training courses.
I can't remember which, I think it might have been Novell's TCP/IP course.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887868</id>
	<title>Re:Ill bet this will happen</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1264418640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>heck, more effort was put into the digital TV switch than seems to be going into IPv6 switch</p></div><p>More plebs care about missing X-Come-Dine-Strictly-Dancing-With-Twats In The Jungle-Factor than care about YouTube and 4chan.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>heck , more effort was put into the digital TV switch than seems to be going into IPv6 switchMore plebs care about missing X-Come-Dine-Strictly-Dancing-With-Twats In The Jungle-Factor than care about YouTube and 4chan .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>heck, more effort was put into the digital TV switch than seems to be going into IPv6 switchMore plebs care about missing X-Come-Dine-Strictly-Dancing-With-Twats In The Jungle-Factor than care about YouTube and 4chan.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883788</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884428</id>
	<title>Re:AnoNet</title>
	<author>BitterOak</author>
	<datestamp>1264342440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AnoNet" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">AnoNet</a> [wikipedia.org] is one of those who use 1.0.0.0/8 for private VPN because everyone thought it wouldn't be in use. I am pretty sure there are A LOT of organizations and other services who do too.</p></div><p>Well that would be their own fault for not using an address like 10.0.0.0/8 which was designed and documented for that purpose.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>AnoNet [ wikipedia.org ] is one of those who use 1.0.0.0/8 for private VPN because everyone thought it would n't be in use .
I am pretty sure there are A LOT of organizations and other services who do too.Well that would be their own fault for not using an address like 10.0.0.0/8 which was designed and documented for that purpose .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> AnoNet [wikipedia.org] is one of those who use 1.0.0.0/8 for private VPN because everyone thought it wouldn't be in use.
I am pretty sure there are A LOT of organizations and other services who do too.Well that would be their own fault for not using an address like 10.0.0.0/8 which was designed and documented for that purpose.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883244</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887522</id>
	<title>Re:Desirable?</title>
	<author>Jesus\_666</author>
	<datestamp>1264413960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I expect life (well, at least online gaming) to become very interesting for the Hamachi users once 5.0.0.0/8 is given to a registry. Well, until 2025 when the first ISPs will start assigning people IPv6 adresses and Hamachi can just take over 0005::/32.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I expect life ( well , at least online gaming ) to become very interesting for the Hamachi users once 5.0.0.0/8 is given to a registry .
Well , until 2025 when the first ISPs will start assigning people IPv6 adresses and Hamachi can just take over 0005 : : /32 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I expect life (well, at least online gaming) to become very interesting for the Hamachi users once 5.0.0.0/8 is given to a registry.
Well, until 2025 when the first ISPs will start assigning people IPv6 adresses and Hamachi can just take over 0005::/32.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883470</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884290</id>
	<title>Re:How's NAT64 coming along?</title>
	<author>The Famous Brett Wat</author>
	<datestamp>1264341420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>People without dual stack will be in for a hard awakening the day servers start appearing with only v6 because they couldn't afford a v4.</p></div><p>Not nearly as hard as the poor schmucks who can't afford the IPv4 address on the server.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>People without dual stack will be in for a hard awakening the day servers start appearing with only v6 because they could n't afford a v4.Not nearly as hard as the poor schmucks who ca n't afford the IPv4 address on the server .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People without dual stack will be in for a hard awakening the day servers start appearing with only v6 because they couldn't afford a v4.Not nearly as hard as the poor schmucks who can't afford the IPv4 address on the server.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883956</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884098</id>
	<title>Re:Hewlett-Packard</title>
	<author>tzot</author>
	<datestamp>1264339860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why does Hewlett-Packard have not one but TWO<nobr> <wbr></nobr><a href="http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/" title="iana.org" rel="nofollow">/8 IPv4 address ranges</a> [iana.org]?</p></div><p>I'm sure you mean "why was HP allowed to keep DEC's<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/8 network after DEC's sell-out-to-Compaq/merger-with-HP?"<br>What should they do? Give such a valuable asset back to IANA saying, thank you, we've got enough IPv4 and we will spend lots of money to reallocate all the DEC/Compaq infrastructure's address assignments?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does Hewlett-Packard have not one but TWO /8 IPv4 address ranges [ iana.org ] ? I 'm sure you mean " why was HP allowed to keep DEC 's /8 network after DEC 's sell-out-to-Compaq/merger-with-HP ?
" What should they do ?
Give such a valuable asset back to IANA saying , thank you , we 've got enough IPv4 and we will spend lots of money to reallocate all the DEC/Compaq infrastructure 's address assignments ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does Hewlett-Packard have not one but TWO /8 IPv4 address ranges [iana.org]?I'm sure you mean "why was HP allowed to keep DEC's /8 network after DEC's sell-out-to-Compaq/merger-with-HP?
"What should they do?
Give such a valuable asset back to IANA saying, thank you, we've got enough IPv4 and we will spend lots of money to reallocate all the DEC/Compaq infrastructure's address assignments?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883680</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887284</id>
	<title>Re:How's NAT64 coming along?</title>
	<author>butlerm</author>
	<datestamp>1264411200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><em> If the existing standard couldn't handle it, then that standard needed to be changed so it could have.</em></p><p>That's the problem, IPv4 had a defective, fixed address length design from the very beginning, and the only way to fix it would require a solution that was not interoperable with IPv4 - not without NAT and ALGs at any rate.</p><p>It would be nice if the IPv6 designers learned from this mistake and designed a variable length address based protocol that wouldn't have the same inevitable obsolescence that IPv4 has, but that is a secondary issue.  The *big* mistake was the decision to use (short) fixed length addresses with IPv4 in the first place.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the existing standard could n't handle it , then that standard needed to be changed so it could have.That 's the problem , IPv4 had a defective , fixed address length design from the very beginning , and the only way to fix it would require a solution that was not interoperable with IPv4 - not without NAT and ALGs at any rate.It would be nice if the IPv6 designers learned from this mistake and designed a variable length address based protocol that would n't have the same inevitable obsolescence that IPv4 has , but that is a secondary issue .
The * big * mistake was the decision to use ( short ) fixed length addresses with IPv4 in the first place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> If the existing standard couldn't handle it, then that standard needed to be changed so it could have.That's the problem, IPv4 had a defective, fixed address length design from the very beginning, and the only way to fix it would require a solution that was not interoperable with IPv4 - not without NAT and ALGs at any rate.It would be nice if the IPv6 designers learned from this mistake and designed a variable length address based protocol that wouldn't have the same inevitable obsolescence that IPv4 has, but that is a secondary issue.
The *big* mistake was the decision to use (short) fixed length addresses with IPv4 in the first place.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887638</id>
	<title>Re:Install your own 6to4 tunnel today</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264415820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am using it with NAT. A number of routers, even cheap ones, allow protocol 41 (ipv6 in ipv4) to go to the "default" destination, either implicitly or adding a rule for proto 41. Mine allows. So the only restriction is that only one 6to4 gateway can be present behind the router, and the CUR\_IP above need to be the private for the tunnel, and the public for the ipv6 prefix.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am using it with NAT .
A number of routers , even cheap ones , allow protocol 41 ( ipv6 in ipv4 ) to go to the " default " destination , either implicitly or adding a rule for proto 41 .
Mine allows .
So the only restriction is that only one 6to4 gateway can be present behind the router , and the CUR \ _IP above need to be the private for the tunnel , and the public for the ipv6 prefix .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am using it with NAT.
A number of routers, even cheap ones, allow protocol 41 (ipv6 in ipv4) to go to the "default" destination, either implicitly or adding a rule for proto 41.
Mine allows.
So the only restriction is that only one 6to4 gateway can be present behind the router, and the CUR\_IP above need to be the private for the tunnel, and the public for the ipv6 prefix.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883394</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884784</id>
	<title>IPv6</title>
	<author>Night64</author>
	<datestamp>1264344900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So, when will the network providers start to offer IPv6 connections?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , when will the network providers start to offer IPv6 connections ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, when will the network providers start to offer IPv6 connections?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883672</id>
	<title>Re:Install your own 6to4 tunnel today</title>
	<author>Dagger2</author>
	<datestamp>1264337100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Only problem is this does not work with NAT.</p></div><p>To be clear, 6to4 needs to be run on the device with your public IP address, or alternately that device needs to pass protocol 41 traffic to the machine doing 6to4. The rest of your network then gets access by native IPv6 routing.</p><p>The presence of NAT is not fatal to 6to4.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Only problem is this does not work with NAT.To be clear , 6to4 needs to be run on the device with your public IP address , or alternately that device needs to pass protocol 41 traffic to the machine doing 6to4 .
The rest of your network then gets access by native IPv6 routing.The presence of NAT is not fatal to 6to4 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only problem is this does not work with NAT.To be clear, 6to4 needs to be run on the device with your public IP address, or alternately that device needs to pass protocol 41 traffic to the machine doing 6to4.
The rest of your network then gets access by native IPv6 routing.The presence of NAT is not fatal to 6to4.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883394</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883604</id>
	<title>Marketing + Consumer Idiocy = Profit!</title>
	<author>greatica</author>
	<datestamp>1264336740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh geez, I'm gonna have to explain things to my Mom after she gets the following notice in the mail:</p><p>"Great news!  Our engineers have invented an amazing new technology called IPv6 that NONE OF OUR COMPETITORS HAVE:  More addresses!  Greater speed!  Less lag!  New HD content never before available!  OMG this new technology called VOIP works over it!  Perform online backups!  And enjoy the $20 increase to your monthly bill!</p><p>That or Obama launches a "Rebates for Routers" program - 6 months AFTER I purchase an IPv6 device.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh geez , I 'm gon na have to explain things to my Mom after she gets the following notice in the mail : " Great news !
Our engineers have invented an amazing new technology called IPv6 that NONE OF OUR COMPETITORS HAVE : More addresses !
Greater speed !
Less lag !
New HD content never before available !
OMG this new technology called VOIP works over it !
Perform online backups !
And enjoy the $ 20 increase to your monthly bill ! That or Obama launches a " Rebates for Routers " program - 6 months AFTER I purchase an IPv6 device .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh geez, I'm gonna have to explain things to my Mom after she gets the following notice in the mail:"Great news!
Our engineers have invented an amazing new technology called IPv6 that NONE OF OUR COMPETITORS HAVE:  More addresses!
Greater speed!
Less lag!
New HD content never before available!
OMG this new technology called VOIP works over it!
Perform online backups!
And enjoy the $20 increase to your monthly bill!That or Obama launches a "Rebates for Routers" program - 6 months AFTER I purchase an IPv6 device.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886236</id>
	<title>We coud have avoided this mess...</title>
	<author>williamyf</author>
	<datestamp>1264356660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If we went forth and put TCP on top of CLNS/CLNP.... But Nooooooo... The "Not Invented Here Syndrome" struckthe IETF, and here we are, with a messy migration to IPv6.</p><p>Have fun!</p><p>Suerte a todos y feliz dia.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If we went forth and put TCP on top of CLNS/CLNP.... But Nooooooo... The " Not Invented Here Syndrome " struckthe IETF , and here we are , with a messy migration to IPv6.Have fun ! Suerte a todos y feliz dia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If we went forth and put TCP on top of CLNS/CLNP.... But Nooooooo... The "Not Invented Here Syndrome" struckthe IETF, and here we are, with a messy migration to IPv6.Have fun!Suerte a todos y feliz dia.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885336</id>
	<title>I'm Waiting...</title>
	<author>Ignatius D'Lusional</author>
	<datestamp>1264348980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Like most people, I'm waiting until my ISP switches to IPv6. Until they change my IP address, then I have no reason to change my internal IP addresses. I mean really, what's the point? Most of us have no control over whether IPv6 is implemented anyway.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Like most people , I 'm waiting until my ISP switches to IPv6 .
Until they change my IP address , then I have no reason to change my internal IP addresses .
I mean really , what 's the point ?
Most of us have no control over whether IPv6 is implemented anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like most people, I'm waiting until my ISP switches to IPv6.
Until they change my IP address, then I have no reason to change my internal IP addresses.
I mean really, what's the point?
Most of us have no control over whether IPv6 is implemented anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883514</id>
	<title>131.0.0.0</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264336260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>For some reason the private network at my work is on 131.0.0.0 with various subnets and VLANS in place.  I believe this is already a public IP Address range for something or other.  <p>No, I don't know why it is that and not something else. We only have a couple hundred assigned IP addresses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For some reason the private network at my work is on 131.0.0.0 with various subnets and VLANS in place .
I believe this is already a public IP Address range for something or other .
No , I do n't know why it is that and not something else .
We only have a couple hundred assigned IP addresses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For some reason the private network at my work is on 131.0.0.0 with various subnets and VLANS in place.
I believe this is already a public IP Address range for something or other.
No, I don't know why it is that and not something else.
We only have a couple hundred assigned IP addresses.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883510</id>
	<title>Map of the Internet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264336260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It looks like that the <a href="http://xkcd.com/195/" title="xkcd.com" rel="nofollow">Map of the internet</a> [xkcd.com] needs to be redrawn soon.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It looks like that the Map of the internet [ xkcd.com ] needs to be redrawn soon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It looks like that the Map of the internet [xkcd.com] needs to be redrawn soon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883456</id>
	<title>Not using any bogons over here</title>
	<author>coolgeek</author>
	<datestamp>1264335960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But I did notice the other day that Time Warner is using 10.0.0.0 for user devices, and not just between the device and its gateway.  Such IPs are exposed to the public, and fully routable within their network.  Well, the cross-section of the public limited to TW customers, I suppose.  I discovered this quite by accident.  I thought my WiFi router was at 10.something and was very puzzled by the web page I received, which said "Scientific-Atlanta WebStar Cable Modem".  Turns out my router is at 10.somethingelse</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But I did notice the other day that Time Warner is using 10.0.0.0 for user devices , and not just between the device and its gateway .
Such IPs are exposed to the public , and fully routable within their network .
Well , the cross-section of the public limited to TW customers , I suppose .
I discovered this quite by accident .
I thought my WiFi router was at 10.something and was very puzzled by the web page I received , which said " Scientific-Atlanta WebStar Cable Modem " .
Turns out my router is at 10.somethingelse</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But I did notice the other day that Time Warner is using 10.0.0.0 for user devices, and not just between the device and its gateway.
Such IPs are exposed to the public, and fully routable within their network.
Well, the cross-section of the public limited to TW customers, I suppose.
I discovered this quite by accident.
I thought my WiFi router was at 10.something and was very puzzled by the web page I received, which said "Scientific-Atlanta WebStar Cable Modem".
Turns out my router is at 10.somethingelse</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887014</id>
	<title>Re:Install your own 6to4 tunnel today</title>
	<author>jbgeek</author>
	<datestamp>1264451520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Too bad, the anycast 192.88.99.1 sucks ass from so many places.  For me, for example, it's in Switzerland, 60ms ping away (Poland).</p><p>I use SiXXS instead, with 15ms pings.</p></div><p>I set up a 6to4 on a Canadian friend's router (Eastlink) and it routed to Sweden.  A friend in Fremont, CA, USA also routes the anycast to Sweden.  My ISP routes it to HE a few hops away.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:lol:</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Too bad , the anycast 192.88.99.1 sucks ass from so many places .
For me , for example , it 's in Switzerland , 60ms ping away ( Poland ) .I use SiXXS instead , with 15ms pings.I set up a 6to4 on a Canadian friend 's router ( Eastlink ) and it routed to Sweden .
A friend in Fremont , CA , USA also routes the anycast to Sweden .
My ISP routes it to HE a few hops away .
: lol :</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Too bad, the anycast 192.88.99.1 sucks ass from so many places.
For me, for example, it's in Switzerland, 60ms ping away (Poland).I use SiXXS instead, with 15ms pings.I set up a 6to4 on a Canadian friend's router (Eastlink) and it routed to Sweden.
A friend in Fremont, CA, USA also routes the anycast to Sweden.
My ISP routes it to HE a few hops away.
:lol:
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883944</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884738</id>
	<title>Re:Unfortunately, applications still behind the cu</title>
	<author>NNKK</author>
	<datestamp>1264344660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>rtorrent and m0n0wall need to get their act together, but the thing is that NFS and MySQL are amongst the services with the least-pressing need to incorporate IPv6, as they're almost never publicly-accessible services (IPv4 is going to live on in internal networks long after it's dead on the wider 'net; remember IPX?).</p><p>MythTV may be an issue, but I'm assuming most of its communication with the outside world happens over HTTP, probably with curllib or similar libraries, so "IPv6 support" should just mean compiling against a reasonably modern version of the library supporting IPv6, and possibly UI tweaks. On the server side, all the major HTTP implementations already support IPv6.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>rtorrent and m0n0wall need to get their act together , but the thing is that NFS and MySQL are amongst the services with the least-pressing need to incorporate IPv6 , as they 're almost never publicly-accessible services ( IPv4 is going to live on in internal networks long after it 's dead on the wider 'net ; remember IPX ?
) .MythTV may be an issue , but I 'm assuming most of its communication with the outside world happens over HTTP , probably with curllib or similar libraries , so " IPv6 support " should just mean compiling against a reasonably modern version of the library supporting IPv6 , and possibly UI tweaks .
On the server side , all the major HTTP implementations already support IPv6 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>rtorrent and m0n0wall need to get their act together, but the thing is that NFS and MySQL are amongst the services with the least-pressing need to incorporate IPv6, as they're almost never publicly-accessible services (IPv4 is going to live on in internal networks long after it's dead on the wider 'net; remember IPX?
).MythTV may be an issue, but I'm assuming most of its communication with the outside world happens over HTTP, probably with curllib or similar libraries, so "IPv6 support" should just mean compiling against a reasonably modern version of the library supporting IPv6, and possibly UI tweaks.
On the server side, all the major HTTP implementations already support IPv6.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883524</id>
	<title>Re:they should start selling IPadresses like phone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264336320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>or 29.09.19.69 (my bday)</p></div><p>So if you had your Social Security number as an IP address, what would it be?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>or 29.09.19.69 ( my bday ) So if you had your Social Security number as an IP address , what would it be ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or 29.09.19.69 (my bday)So if you had your Social Security number as an IP address, what would it be?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883342</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886220</id>
	<title>Re:1.* to APNIC?</title>
	<author>FlyingGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1264356600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yup, it's really simple now...<br>
iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -s 1.0.0.0/8  -j DROP</p><p>And I have no fucking idea how to do that in IPV6.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yup , it 's really simple now.. . iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -s 1.0.0.0/8 -j DROPAnd I have no fucking idea how to do that in IPV6 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yup, it's really simple now...
iptables -A INPUT -p tcp -s 1.0.0.0/8  -j DROPAnd I have no fucking idea how to do that in IPV6.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885342</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885662</id>
	<title>Re:Dual stack is NOT the solution.</title>
	<author>Idiomatick</author>
	<datestamp>1264351620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It would buy like 20years and get ipv6 implemented... rather than the 5 and we're fucked that we have now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It would buy like 20years and get ipv6 implemented... rather than the 5 and we 're fucked that we have now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would buy like 20years and get ipv6 implemented... rather than the 5 and we're fucked that we have now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884372</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883442</id>
	<title>How's NAT64 coming along?</title>
	<author>Nicolas MONNET</author>
	<datestamp>1264335840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the beginning of IPv6, something was missing: the possibility for IPv4 only hosts to reach IPv6 only hosts. The solution is a form of nat, called NAT64, but a few months ago it was just a vague proposal AFAIK. As long as this is not solved, the transition to IPv6 *cannot* work. There is a simple reason: the planned transition involves ALL hosts talking both IPv4 and IPv6. When you speak both, inevitably the least used IPv6 is not supported well, and people end up using only IPv4.</p><p>It's so obvious, I find it shocking it's not taken into account more seriously.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From the beginning of IPv6 , something was missing : the possibility for IPv4 only hosts to reach IPv6 only hosts .
The solution is a form of nat , called NAT64 , but a few months ago it was just a vague proposal AFAIK .
As long as this is not solved , the transition to IPv6 * can not * work .
There is a simple reason : the planned transition involves ALL hosts talking both IPv4 and IPv6 .
When you speak both , inevitably the least used IPv6 is not supported well , and people end up using only IPv4.It 's so obvious , I find it shocking it 's not taken into account more seriously .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the beginning of IPv6, something was missing: the possibility for IPv4 only hosts to reach IPv6 only hosts.
The solution is a form of nat, called NAT64, but a few months ago it was just a vague proposal AFAIK.
As long as this is not solved, the transition to IPv6 *cannot* work.
There is a simple reason: the planned transition involves ALL hosts talking both IPv4 and IPv6.
When you speak both, inevitably the least used IPv6 is not supported well, and people end up using only IPv4.It's so obvious, I find it shocking it's not taken into account more seriously.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883854</id>
	<title>Re:How's NAT64 coming along?</title>
	<author>Abcd1234</author>
	<datestamp>1264338240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As I understand it, NAT64 has gotten greater attention in the last little while as people involved in v6 have finally come to the conclusion that it, or something like it, is going to be necessary to make the transition happen.</p><p>'course, personally, I think it's far more important that we get old, broken routers shut down ASAP.  Today, people at home are actively *turning off* the v6 stack on their desktops because their broken routers erroneously send out radv broadcasts, despite having no v6 connectivity.  The result is massive delays due to v6 connection timeouts.  Meanwhile, service providers who support v6 are actively choosing not to add AAAA records to their sites because those with broken v6 connectivity would see poor service (Google is one of those doing this, which is why for most, www.google.com has no AAAA record, while ipv6.google.com does... unless your v6 provider has negotiated a special arrangement with Google, at which point they'll provide AAAA records for all of their services).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As I understand it , NAT64 has gotten greater attention in the last little while as people involved in v6 have finally come to the conclusion that it , or something like it , is going to be necessary to make the transition happen .
'course , personally , I think it 's far more important that we get old , broken routers shut down ASAP .
Today , people at home are actively * turning off * the v6 stack on their desktops because their broken routers erroneously send out radv broadcasts , despite having no v6 connectivity .
The result is massive delays due to v6 connection timeouts .
Meanwhile , service providers who support v6 are actively choosing not to add AAAA records to their sites because those with broken v6 connectivity would see poor service ( Google is one of those doing this , which is why for most , www.google.com has no AAAA record , while ipv6.google.com does... unless your v6 provider has negotiated a special arrangement with Google , at which point they 'll provide AAAA records for all of their services ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As I understand it, NAT64 has gotten greater attention in the last little while as people involved in v6 have finally come to the conclusion that it, or something like it, is going to be necessary to make the transition happen.
'course, personally, I think it's far more important that we get old, broken routers shut down ASAP.
Today, people at home are actively *turning off* the v6 stack on their desktops because their broken routers erroneously send out radv broadcasts, despite having no v6 connectivity.
The result is massive delays due to v6 connection timeouts.
Meanwhile, service providers who support v6 are actively choosing not to add AAAA records to their sites because those with broken v6 connectivity would see poor service (Google is one of those doing this, which is why for most, www.google.com has no AAAA record, while ipv6.google.com does... unless your v6 provider has negotiated a special arrangement with Google, at which point they'll provide AAAA records for all of their services).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883440</id>
	<title>Wouldn't more widespread SNI support be nice?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264335840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where I work perhaps 50\% of our IP allocations are due to requests for SSL websites. Now imagine a world without IE6/Windows XP where IIS supported SNI. Unfortunately I suspect Microsoft has once again been far too slow to catch up. That was the obligatory Microsoft bash out the way - seriously though, how long is it going to take to finally lose the ridiculous single address per site requirement for websites in a globally supported manner?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where I work perhaps 50 \ % of our IP allocations are due to requests for SSL websites .
Now imagine a world without IE6/Windows XP where IIS supported SNI .
Unfortunately I suspect Microsoft has once again been far too slow to catch up .
That was the obligatory Microsoft bash out the way - seriously though , how long is it going to take to finally lose the ridiculous single address per site requirement for websites in a globally supported manner ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where I work perhaps 50\% of our IP allocations are due to requests for SSL websites.
Now imagine a world without IE6/Windows XP where IIS supported SNI.
Unfortunately I suspect Microsoft has once again been far too slow to catch up.
That was the obligatory Microsoft bash out the way - seriously though, how long is it going to take to finally lose the ridiculous single address per site requirement for websites in a globally supported manner?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885456</id>
	<title>Re:they should start selling IPadresses like phone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264350060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>0.0.0.2<br>
<br>
Sincerely,<br>
M. Burns.</htmltext>
<tokenext>0.0.0.2 Sincerely , M. Burns .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>0.0.0.2

Sincerely,
M. Burns.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883524</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883810
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30888308
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883394
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883584
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884126
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883626
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883930
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884616
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884912
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884642
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884342
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883244
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885768
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883342
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884128
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883432
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884048
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887284
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883852
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883394
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883944
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887014
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886808
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884386
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883342
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883524
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30893536
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883244
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886008
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30888236
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883244
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886008
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30888840
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883244
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886008
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30889060
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886452
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883244
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886008
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30893374
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883244
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886652
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884098
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883342
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883524
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887212
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30901204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883342
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883524
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30890030
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883342
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884010
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883342
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883524
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885456
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883342
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883884
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883816
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887522
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883342
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30895116
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883690
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885008
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30890398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885116
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30892476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30888242
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884120
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30892814
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883522
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885342
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886220
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883394
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887222
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884372
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885662
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887334
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883394
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884966
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884616
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887510
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883874
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30889862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885130
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883502
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883394
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883672
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883954
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883384
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885198
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884738
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883394
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883342
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885126
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883342
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884616
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30888118
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883366
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883424
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885526
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887926
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884588
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883510
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884226
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883276
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887868
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884472
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883394
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883944
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30888130
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887244
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30892482
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883342
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_24_2139250_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883970
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886206
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883598
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884616
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884912
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887510
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885656
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30888118
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885116
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885526
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887926
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883794
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884642
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884952
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887244
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885008
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884738
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884210
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885054
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884948
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883442
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883852
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884272
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30888242
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887284
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883956
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884342
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887222
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884290
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884372
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885662
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887334
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885776
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886452
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884386
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883854
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883622
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886068
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883244
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884428
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886008
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30888236
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30888840
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30889060
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30893374
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885350
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885768
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883924
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885428
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885342
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886220
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883552
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883384
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885198
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883514
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884776
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883930
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884126
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884784
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884054
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883394
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886486
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887438
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884966
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883944
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887014
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30888130
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883672
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884018
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887638
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883440
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30892476
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883796
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883276
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883788
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887868
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30901204
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30889862
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884048
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884120
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883810
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30888308
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884600
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884062
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886652
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30892814
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884588
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883680
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884098
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30892482
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883954
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884066
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883370
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883502
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883510
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884226
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883342
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884010
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30895116
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883884
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884128
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883524
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30893536
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30890030
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885456
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887212
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883786
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883612
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883806
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883486
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883898
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884280
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883690
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883770
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885602
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883428
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30890398
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883348
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883432
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883470
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887522
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883604
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883366
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30886808
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30887848
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883856
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30885130
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883626
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883438
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883618
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883874
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884282
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883522
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883424
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_24_2139250.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883456
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883816
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30884472
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_24_2139250.30883906
</commentlist>
</conversation>
