[75191] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joe Abley)
Mon Nov 8 18:51:52 2004
In-Reply-To: <Pine.CYG.4.58.0411081709210.616@citabria>
Cc: Leo Bicknell <bicknell@ufp.org>, NANOG Edu <nanog@Merit.edu>
From: Joe Abley <jabley@isc.org>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 18:50:53 -0500
To: Adi Linden <adil@adis.on.ca>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On 8 Nov 2004, at 18:18, Adi Linden wrote:
>
>> I don't know of any applications that require RFC1918 addresses to be
>> deployed. (Clearly, this is not to say there are none.)
>
> There are a number of good and reasonable uses for RFC1918 addresses.
>
> [one reasonable use]
Yes, I mentioned that in the paragraph following the one you quoted.
There is more than one way to skin that cat, however, and not every way
requires RFC1918 address analogues to be made available in v6.
Joe
