Re: IPv8 / BGP8 / CF

Jaimie, I will put up an RFP for my time machine. I saw you in the
future, you are homeless and addicted to fentanyl.

EOF. Blocked for wasting all of our time.

On Sat, May 2, 2026 at 2:06 PM Jamie Thain via NANOG
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Justin,
>
> Because before you write a line of code you have to get it right, or near
> right.
>
> If you want to see good engineering watch from the "Earth to the Moon" Spider,
> how they built the lunar lander.
>
> So far I've had like 3 serious conversations about "this won't work" and each
> one has had me improve it. But "go make code" before we discuss what and how it
> should be, a DRAFT is actually when you want comments about the operation of it
> all.
>
> I'm not going to wait until I written 1m worth of code to figure something is
> wrong.
>
> IETF folks suggested to me, that I join Nanog to see how they might use it. IPv8
> is not about address space.
>
>
>
> Jamie
>
>
>
> On Sat, May 2, 2026 at 11:12 AM Justin Streiner via NANOG
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> > I know of enterprises who are deploying v6.
> >
> > Until you can show the world a working IPv8 implementation on a large using
> > off-the-shelf components where people can run through failure scenarios and
> > really beat it up, not many people are going to take it seriously.
> >
> > Lower layers of the network relying on the functionality of higher layers
> > is a really, really, really bad idea.
> >
> > While it's always important to think about how to so something better, v8
> > seems to create a whole bunch of new problems while not solving many that
> > have already been addressed in v6 and other protocols.
> >
> > Thank you
> > jms
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 1, 2026, 23:22 Jamie Thain via NANOG <[email protected]
> > [[email protected]]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Andrew,
> > >
> > > Cell phones. And Cloud. Not Corps. I started some of this, I mentioned IPv6
> > > in a meeting and two corp engineers laughed.
> > >
> > > You can google it yourself.
> > >
> > > Jamie
> > >
> > > On Sat, May 2, 2026 at 12:19 AM Andrew Kirch via NANOG <
> > > [email protected] [[email protected]]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > If no corporation is migrating then why is IPv6 traffic continuing to
> > > > increase?
> > > >
> > > > As I pointed out, IPv6 traffic increased 5% last year.  At that
> > > admittedly
> > > > slow rate, the entire internet will be IPv6 in 10 years.
> > > >
> > > > Further your assertion that business is the prime mover is incorrect.
> > > > Business will move when they have to.  That time is coming.
> > > >
> > > > When businesses can’t get IPv4 from their providers or superscaler, or a
> > > > vendor or client can’t reach them, they will move.
> > > >
> > > > Andrew
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, May 1, 2026 at 11:14 PM Jamie Thain via NANOG <
> > > > [email protected] [[email protected]]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Andrew,
> > > > >
> > > > > The issue is for corporate and the cloud, IPv6 is just as broken as
> > > IPv4.
> > > > >
> > > > > And no corporate is migrating go look.  Its been the next big thing in
> > > > > Corporate networks for 20 years.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jamie
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2026 at 5:26 PM Andrew Kirch via NANOG <
> > > > > [email protected] [[email protected]]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I oppose this.  With IPv6 traffic now representing around half of
> > > > > internet
> > > > > > traffic, the time to rethink has long passed.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If IPv8 was going to be a solution, it should have been a solution 10
> > > > > years
> > > > > > ago.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In the last 12 months, ~5% of traffic migrated to IPv6.  At that
> > > rate,
> > > > > IPv6
> > > > > > will be fully implemented by 2035.  I'm not seeing a problem that
> > > needs
> > > > > to
> > > > > > be solved, or a credible solution.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Andrew
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2026 at 3:23 PM Jamie Thain via NANOG <
> > > > > > [email protected] [[email protected]]>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > My name is Jamie Thain I'm the creator of IPv8. It's not a hoax.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I joined this list because, as part of IPv8, I am creating a BGPv8.
> > > > > > Inside
> > > > > > > BGPv8, two new protocols CF (Cost Factor), weigh cost factors along
> > > > the
> > > > > > > routes to produce a better metric. It's a hybrid of EIRGP mixed
> > > with
> > > > > BGP
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > create better engineering results.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I also as part of CF created Sun Tzu which is the protocol that
> > > > watches
> > > > > > CF
> > > > > > > and gives you a CF score of reliability.  Do I trust my partnership
> > > > > with
> > > > > > > you?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Now, beyond an on-slaught of IPv8 is stupid, IPv6 solves every
> > > > problem,
> > > > > > > etc, etc. That's not my discussion point. My point isn't "should I
> > > > even
> > > > > > > propose IPv8" my point is what would be the best result for
> > > > operators?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I believe that since IPv8 solves the duopoly problem, it will
> > > replace
> > > > > > > IPv4.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So the things to know, IPV8 is NOT a 64 bit addressing system.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It is a 32 bit routing system with a 32 bit addressing system.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > A Routing Number = ASNs plus others.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 8.8.8.8 would become 15169.8.8.8.8
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-thain-ipv8-02.html
> > [https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-thain-ipv8-02.html]
> > > > > > > <
> > > > > > > https://l.shortlink.es/l/3ae384c1b8e2eb92749595407c5cf9b87ea
> > [https://l.shortlink.es/l/3ae384c1b8e2eb92749595407c5cf9b87ea]
> > > > > > 3372a?u=12457652
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So each ASN in the world will have 3 Billion available addresses.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > There is a specially reserved group of internal ASN 127.x.x.x so
> > > each
> > > > > > corp,
> > > > > > > org, has 16 Million areas of 3 Billion addresses, to replace
> > > 10.x.x.x
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > 100.64.x.x.x
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'd appreciate your thoughts on it
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Jamie
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > NANOG mailing list
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/
> > [https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/]
> > > > > > message/KPDE4FNBRLQYZOVF5FUAAGJCBSKNS42Q/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > NANOG mailing list
> > > > > > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/
> > [https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/]
> > > > > > message/D3YXYDYJWWH3A7WZZBYSJQAZOMLECQK7/
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > NANOG mailing list
> > > > >
> > > > > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/
> > [https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/]
> > > > message/QPBOJRGHJ72YGIQ5BIPMIM4WIXCLZOLA/
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > NANOG mailing list
> > > > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/
> > [https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/]
> > > > message/VPK4LEVG7XSXPYL54J3OZKBOJN27HWWD/
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > NANOG mailing list
> > >
> > > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/
> > message/52EWJ6VAN5YXXENIATYZAPIYO5KJAANT/
> > [https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/52EWJ6VAN5YXXENIATYZAPIYO5KJAANT/]
> > _______________________________________________
> > NANOG mailing list
> > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/
> > message/2MY7QMH6L67IEHGXMNM5SWFWP4LWCW6C/
> > [https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/2MY7QMH6L67IEHGXMNM5SWFWP4LWCW6C/]
>
> []
> _______________________________________________
> NANOG mailing list
> https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/JTNFIASLS5MTKKP64R7FV6NDPTH2T6PW/
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list 
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/Q7DI7HVCRB267A4FFXJNZ7DBC6AEACGQ/