nanog mailing list archives
Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space
From: Doug Barton <dougb () dougbarton us>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 10:49:27 -0700
On 7/17/2012 5:47 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
I wonder who really believes there is no usage case for NAT66. Have these people seen non-trivial corporate networks? I'm sure many people in this list finance part of their lives with renumber projects costing MUSDs. For many companies just finding out where addresses have been punched in (your FWs, your software, partner FWs, partner software, configurations...) will take months, before even starting renumbering.
For those with PA space https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6144 should be a good solution. Doug -- If you're never wrong, you're not trying hard enough
Current thread:
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space, (continued)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Owen DeLong (Jul 16)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Karl Auer (Jul 17)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Matt Addison (Jul 17)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Doug Barton (Jul 17)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Owen DeLong (Jul 16)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Oliver (Jul 17)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Jimmy Hess (Jul 16)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space -Hammer- (Jul 17)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Saku Ytti (Jul 17)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space -Hammer- (Jul 17)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Doug Barton (Jul 17)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Ray Soucy (Jul 17)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space valdis . kletnieks (Jul 14)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Randy Bush (Jul 14)
- RE: using "reserved" IPv6 space Tony Hain (Jul 14)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Randy Bush (Jul 14)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Grzegorz Janoszka (Jul 15)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Scott Morris (Jul 15)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Cameron Byrne (Jul 15)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Grzegorz Janoszka (Jul 15)
- Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space Mike Jones (Jul 15)