nanog mailing list archives
Re: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group]
From: Bill Stewart <nonobvious () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:59:24 -0800
Maybe I'm dense, but I don't see the problem. One of the great things about IPv6's address space being mindbogglingly large is that there's plenty of it to experiment with. If the ITU wants an RIR-sized block to do RIR-like work, so what? If they wanted a /2 or /4 I'd be concerned, or if there were many organizations out there that wanted RIR-sized chunks, but ITU's close enough to unique that they're not going to cause the space to run out. And sure, maybe they're sufficiently outdated and irrelevant that they could get by with a /16, but it might be interesting to have somebody assigning IPv6 addresses as :prefix:e164:host or whatever. (Admittedly, that made more sense back when e.164 addresses were 12 digits as opposed to the current 15.) -- ---- Thanks; Bill Note that this isn't my regular email account - It's still experimental so far. And Google probably logs and indexes everything you send it.
Current thread:
- Re: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group], (continued)
- Re: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group] Kevin Oberman (Feb 26)
- Re: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group] Jake Khuon (Feb 26)
- Re: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group] Nick Hilliard (Feb 27)
- Re: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group] Nick Hilliard (Feb 27)
- Re: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group] Jorge Amodio (Feb 27)
- Re: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group] Joel Jaeggli (Feb 27)
- Re: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group] Tony Finch (Feb 27)
- Re: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group] joel jaeggli (Feb 27)
- Re: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group] Randy Bush (Feb 28)
- Re: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group] Antonio Querubin (Feb 26)
- Re: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group] Bill Stewart (Feb 26)
- Re: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group] Jorge Amodio (Feb 26)
- Re: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group] Jorge Amodio (Feb 26)
- Re: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group] Owen DeLong (Feb 26)
- Re: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group] Jorge Amodio (Feb 26)
- Re: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group] Steven M. Bellovin (Feb 26)
- Re: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group] Jorge Amodio (Feb 26)
- Re: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group] Danny McPherson (Feb 26)
- Re: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group] John Levine (Feb 26)
- Re: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group] Jorge Amodio (Feb 26)