[125914] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: [Re: http://tools.ietf.org/search/draft-hain-ipv6-ulac-01]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher Morrow)
Mon Apr 26 11:12:40 2010
In-Reply-To: <69F9805C-0D15-4610-9BC4-9F6028C265B2@delong.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 11:12:00 -0400
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
To: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
Cc: Tony Hoyle <tony@hoyle.me.uk>, nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
> We, for one, use static assignments at HE.
HE.net provides a fine tunneled service, they have a limited number of
'pops', so it can afford to split their initial allocation up into
very large chunks ... look at the typical DSL/cable deployment,
splitting of headends and or pops COULD cause outgrowth of the initial
pop-level allocation and forcing a re-addressing of the downstream
users, if keeping some aggregation is relevant to the provider.
I hear HE is headed back to their local RIR for another allocation though, eh?
-chris
