[117942] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Practical numbers for IPv6 allocations
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Conrad)
Tue Oct 6 21:27:50 2009
From: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
In-Reply-To: <480A7B9A-F4B5-4CFF-A9EE-4C8874A10993@virtualized.org>
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 18:27:09 -0700
To: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Oct 6, 2009, at 6:17 PM, David Conrad wrote:
> On Oct 6, 2009, at 6:13 PM, Nathan Ward wrote:
>> My understanding is that the RIRs are doing sparse allocation, as
>> opposed to reserving a few bits. I could be wrong.
>
> Last I heard, with the exception of APNIC and contrary to what they
> indicated they'd do prior to IANA allocating the /12s, you are
> indeed wrong. I'd be happy to hear things have changed.
Sigh. Seem to have troubles posting coherent English to the Nanog list
recently. The "they" in the above sentence references the RIRs except
for APNIC (last I heard).
Regards,
-drc
