[85722] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 news
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joe Abley)
Sun Oct 16 11:08:40 2005
In-Reply-To: <1129472823.16319.47.camel@house.inconspicuous.org>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
From: Joe Abley <jabley@isc.org>
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:08:13 -0400
To: John Reilly <jr@inconspicuous.org>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On 16-Oct-2005, at 10:27, John Reilly wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-10-15 at 22:02 -0700, David Conrad wrote:
>
>> I _really_ wish people would stop saying '"unlimited"' or 'almost
>> infinite' when talking about IPv6 address space. It simply isn't
>> true, even in the theoretical sense, and particularly given how
>> address space is being allocated now. It also gives many people the
>> wrong impression: that IPv6 addresses will mean every grain of sand
>> in the Universe (or whatever) can have portable address space.
>
> Am I mistaken in thinking that if shim6 (or something like it) did
> exist, that portable address space could be allocated to everyone
> (maybe
> with a different allocation policy?) to be used as (shim6)
> identifiers.
Yes, you're mistaken. The locator identifier is chosen from the
host's pool of upper-layer identifiers.
Many people speculating and asking questions in this thread would do
very well to take a quick read through this high-level description:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-shim6-arch-00.txt
Note also (as Susan mentioned) the IAB is facilitating a BOF on IPv6
multi-homing in Los Angeles, for those who are planning to attend.
Joe
