[151362] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: shared address space... a reality!
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (William Herrin)
Fri Mar 16 15:37:12 2012
In-Reply-To: <op.wa9y1kcz4oyyg1@alvarezp-ws>
From: William Herrin <bill@herrin.us>
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 15:35:42 -0400
To: Octavio Alvarez <alvarezp@alvarezp.ods.org>
Cc: nanog list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Octavio Alvarez
<alvarezp@alvarezp.ods.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 23:22:04 -0700, Christopher Morrow
> <christopher.morrow@gmail.com> wrote:
>> NetRange: =A0 =A0 =A0 100.64.0.0 - 100.127.255.255
>> CIDR: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 100.64.0.0/10
>> OriginAS:
>> NetName: =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0SHARED-ADDRESS-SPACE-RFCTBD-IANA-RESERVED
>
> Weren't we supposed to *solve* the end-to-end connectivity problem,
> instead of just letting it live?
"We" forgot to ask if all the stakeholders wanted it solved. Most
self-styled "enterprise" operators don't: they want a major control
point at the network border. Deliberately breaking end to end makes
that control more certain. Which is why they deployed IPv4 NAT boxen
long before address scarcity became an impactful issue.
Regards,
Bill Herrin
--=20
William D. Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com=A0 bill@herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
