[175186] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 Default Allocation - What size allocation are you giving out
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Roland Dobbins)
Fri Oct 10 10:53:31 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Roland Dobbins <rdobbins@arbor.net>
In-Reply-To: <87FFE8F6-7458-4428-BDC3-1523692523EC@delong.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2014 21:53:17 +0700
To: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Oct 10, 2014, at 9:45 PM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
> I=92m sorry, but this argument utterly fails under any form of =
analysis.
I think he's talking about IPv4 - and saying that since he apparently =
doesn't have the budget for enough IPv4 subnets to address his =
point-to-point links, he's inclined to repeat this suboptimal practice =
on the IPv6 side in the name of 'consistency'.
But he knows best, and we oughtn't to try and dissuade him any further, =
as that just upsets him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Roland Dobbins <rdobbins@arbor.net> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com>
Equo ne credite, Teucri.
-- Laoco=F6n
