nanog mailing list archives
Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public
From: Matt Palmer <mpalmer () hezmatt org>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021 11:27:44 +1100
On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 11:29:49PM +0000, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
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.
I didn't comment because I was laughing too hard to be able to reliably use the keyboard. - Matt
Current thread:
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public, (continued)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Joe Maimon (Nov 20)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Max Harmony via NANOG (Nov 20)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Joe Maimon (Nov 20)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Owen DeLong via NANOG (Nov 21)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Dave Taht (Nov 19)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Owen DeLong via NANOG (Nov 19)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Owen DeLong via NANOG (Nov 19)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Jay R. Ashworth (Nov 19)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Sean Donelan (Nov 18)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Owen DeLong via NANOG (Nov 19)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Owen DeLong via NANOG (Nov 19)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Gaurav Kansal (Nov 20)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Owen DeLong via NANOG (Nov 20)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Owen DeLong via NANOG (Nov 19)