[124942] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John Palmer \(NANOG Acct\))
Wed Apr 7 18:55:20 2010
From: "John Palmer \(NANOG Acct\)" <nanog2@adns.net>
To: "NANOG list" <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 17:54:44 -0500
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
I kind of thought that was something that had already been worked out.
Thats what I get for not paying close enough attention.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Deepak Jain" <deepak@ai.net>
To: "Lee Howard" <lee@asgard.org>; "'Gary E. Miller'" <gem@rellim.com>; "'OwenDeLong'" <owen@delong.com>
Cc: "'NANOG list'" <nanog@nanog.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 5:31 PM
Subject: RE: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space
Now I may be talking crazy...
IIRC, all of IPv4 space maps to a section of IPv6 space.
<mad hat on>
If one has legacy IPv4 space, but actually talks IPv6 couldn't one announce a prefix much longer than a /64 to map them onto the
IPv6 universe (assuming people would allow such craziness... perhaps on their IPv4 speaking routers) and originate/terminate traffic
as normal?
</mad hat off>
Isn't this all left to the networks to enforce, as usual, but unlike the status quo, these are all valid allocations...
Technical note: I know this breaks lots of IPv6 goodness (no need to enumerate it here).
DJ
