[125702] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: [Re: http://tools.ietf.org/search/draft-hain-ipv6-ulac-01]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher Morrow)
Wed Apr 21 10:57:16 2010
In-Reply-To: <22565F5E-D9B8-48A4-AE08-C0BE94A7D6C2@virtualized.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 10:56:30 -0400
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
To: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 10:23 AM, David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org> wrote:
> On Apr 21, 2010, at 6:25 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>> I agree with owen, mostly... except I think we should just push RIR's
>> to make GUA accessible to folks that need ipv6 adress space,
>> regardless of connectiivty to thegreater 'internet' (for some
>> definition of that thing).
>
> See RFC 1814. =A0Fun how history repeats itself.
yes... for those less willing to search: "Unique Addresses are Good"
The abstract:
The IAB suggests that while RFC 1597 establishes reserved IP address
space for the use of private networks which are isolated and will
remain isolated from the Internet, any enterprise which anticipates
external connectivity to the Internet should apply for a globally
unique address from an Internet registry or service provider.
This does seem to be pretty much exactly my point (their point I suppose)
Thx (as always drc)
-chris
