nanog mailing list archives
Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?]
From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch () muada com>
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 19:53:44 +0100
On 20-nov-04, at 21:45, Paul Vixie wrote:
for all these reasons, large or multihoming endsystems will need V6PI allocations and at some point the RIRs are going to have to define/allowthis.
I find your attitude in this regard disturbing, especially as:
(note that i'm not speaking for arin, nor as a member-elect of arin's board of trustees, i'm just another bozo on this bus.)
You're bascially saying that you and people like you are so important that you deserve to receive benefits that go against the public good. While you're high and dry, the hoi polloi can renumber while at the same time suffering increased ISP costs because of the unnecessarily high hardware costs created by all those PI prefixes. In other words, today's equivalent of "let them eat cake".
It also shows contempt for the IETF, as you reject all possible alternatives to PI out of hand.
there is no possibility that any enterprise where i am responsiblefor planning or design will ever run PA addresses out to the desktop -- it makes multihoming impossible, which would leave me at the mercy of a singleprovider's uptime, and a single provider's pricing.
Work is underway to remedy this. However, if the RIRs decide to open up PI in IPv6, people will take the quick fix and there won't be any push to get the (admittedly) more complex but more scalable solutions to these problems off the ground.
Current thread:
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?], (continued)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Kevin Loch (Nov 20)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Paul Vixie (Nov 20)
- RE: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] David Schwartz (Nov 20)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] william(at)elan.net (Nov 20)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Jerry Pasker (Nov 20)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Paul Vixie (Nov 21)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Stephen Sprunk (Nov 21)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Kevin Loch (Nov 21)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Petri Helenius (Nov 21)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Alex Bligh (Nov 21)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Iljitsch van Beijnum (Nov 21)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Paul Vixie (Nov 21)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Iljitsch van Beijnum (Nov 22)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Paul Vixie (Nov 22)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Jeroen Massar (Nov 22)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Paul Vixie (Nov 22)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] william(at)elan.net (Nov 22)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] william(at)elan.net (Nov 22)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Kurt Erik Lindqvist (Nov 28)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Jeroen Massar (Nov 22)
- Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?] Paul Vixie (Nov 22)