[123307] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IP4 Space
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steve Bertrand)
Thu Mar 4 22:30:03 2010
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 22:29:28 -0500
From: Steve Bertrand <steve@ibctech.ca>
To: William Herrin <bill@herrin.us>
In-Reply-To: <4B907A01.5040606@ibctech.ca>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 2010.03.04 22:26, Steve Bertrand wrote:
> On 2010.03.04 16:53, William Herrin wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Stan Barber <sob@academ.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mar 4, 2010, at 1:30 PM, William Herrin wrote:
>>>> Because we expect far fewer end users to multihome tomorrow than do today?
>>>
>>> I would suggest that the ratio of folks that will multihome under IPv6
>>> versus those that won't will get smaller. I base that on an assumption that
>>> NAT (as we know it today) will be less prevalent as IPv6 usage grows.
>>
>> Alrighty then...
>
> heh.
>
> Stan, you've got things backwards, no matter which direction you are
> looking at things from. I'm thinking that you may have written the
> sentence incorrectly.
>
> It's unfortunate, but it is reality.
>
> Have you reviewed your RIR policy lately? v6 will be flying out the
> window soon, and your local RIR may be assigning PI space like candy.
>
> Welcome IPv6.
fwiw, it didn't appear clear to me that my own comments reflected my
feelings that the migration was a good thing ;)
STeve
