[124585] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: legacy /8
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Cutler James R)
Fri Apr 2 18:02:54 2010
From: Cutler James R <james.cutler@consultant.com>
In-Reply-To: <4BB65B39.8010902@mompl.net>
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 18:01:18 -0400
To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
I also just got a fresh box of popcorn. I will sit by and wait for =
Jeroen to do a business analysis and tell me the return on investment. =
(Assuming that he can find any legal grounds for demanding return of =
legacy /8 allocations.)
All of the analysis results I have seen mention figuratively beating =
oneself [..painfully..] with combat boots.
Running out of IP addresses is not a soon realized scenario for IPv6. If =
an organization runs out of IP addresses, the difficulty is with top =
management, not the network or address space.
I think this is a many-iterated discussion, also know by some as a =
"rathole".=20
On Apr 2, 2010, at 5:01 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> I am curious. Once we're nearing exhausting all IPv4 space will there =
ever come a time to ask/demand/force returning all these legacy /8 =
allocations? I think I understand the difficulty in that, but then =
running out of IPs is also a difficult issue. :-)
>=20
> For some reason I sooner see all IPv4 space being exhausted than IPv6 =
being actually implemented globally.
>=20
> Greetings,
> Jeroen
>=20
James R. Cutler
james.cutler@consultant.com
