Posted by
ryuzaki0
on from the ip-address-in-every-pot dept.
miladus writes "According to a story at Zdnet,
Asian countries are running out of IP addresses. China, for example,
was assigned 22 million IP addresses (for a population of 1.3 billion)
under IPv4. The US owns 70 percent of current IP addresses. Perhaps IPv6 will solve the problem."
Just redistrubute the Guangdong IP addresses
by
tbase
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
They should just unplug China's Guangdong province from the rest of the Internet - that should buy Asia a few more IP Addresses', and the 'dongs can hack and spam themselves instead of the rest of us:-)
--
666-607: 6th floor apartment of the beast
Re:They should really swap to IPV6 then..
by
nempo
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
HDTV, thought that came from some consortium of mostly asian companies.
Actually, they do speak english because of england (read brittish colonies).
-- --- No, english is not my mother tongue.
Re:NAT still useful
by
3.1415926535
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
For about the fifty-billionth time, NAT is not the same as a firewall. While firewalls and NATs often go hand-in-hand, they are by no means equivalent.
Or perhaps NAT or IPMasq will solve the problem, as it has everywhere else...
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
Yes, IPv6 is the future.
And it always will be.
--
Mod up a post Rob doesn't like and you'll never mod again
That's also why Al Gore isn't your president.
Buy a Nintendo DS Lite
They should just unplug China's Guangdong province from the rest of the Internet - that should buy Asia a few more IP Addresses', and the 'dongs can hack and spam themselves instead of the rest of us :-)
666-607: 6th floor apartment of the beast
HDTV, thought that came from some consortium of mostly asian companies.
Actually, they do speak english because of england (read brittish colonies).
--- No, english is not my mother tongue.
For about the fifty-billionth time, NAT is not the same as a firewall. While firewalls and NATs often go hand-in-hand, they are by no means equivalent.