nanog mailing list archives
Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public
From: "Jay R. Ashworth" <jra () baylink com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2021 23:29:49 +0000 (UTC)
This seems like a really bad idea to me; am I really the only one who noticed? https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-schoen-intarea-unicast-127-00.html That's over a week old and I don't see 3000 comments on it, so maybe it's just me. So many things are just me. [ Hat tip to Lauren Weinstein, whom I stole it from ] Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra () baylink com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://www.bcp38.info St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 1274
Current thread:
- Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Jay R. Ashworth (Nov 17)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public scott (Nov 17)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Mark Andrews (Nov 17)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Joe Maimon (Nov 17)
- Re: WKBI #586, Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public John Levine (Nov 17)
- Re: WKBI #586, Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Joe Maimon (Nov 17)
- Re: WKBI #586, Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Mark Andrews (Nov 17)
- Re: WKBI #586, Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Joe Maimon (Nov 18)
- Re: WKBI #586, Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public John R. Levine (Nov 18)
- Re: WKBI #586, Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Joe Maimon (Nov 18)
- Re: WKBI #586, Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Justin Streiner (Nov 18)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Mark Andrews (Nov 17)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public scott (Nov 17)