Re: IPv6 news

[John Reilly <jr () inconspicuous org>]

Forgot sub to nanog-post..

-------- Forwarded Message --------

On Sat, 2005-10-15 at 22:02 -0700, David Conrad wrote:
> I _really_ wish people would stop saying '"unlimited"' or 'almost  
> infinite' when talking about IPv6 address space.  It simply isn't  
> true, even in the theoretical sense, and particularly given how  
> address space is being allocated now.  It also gives many people the  
> wrong impression: that IPv6 addresses will mean every grain of sand  
> in the Universe (or whatever) can have portable address space.

Am I mistaken in thinking that if shim6 (or something like it) did
exist, that portable address space could be allocated to everyone (maybe
with a different allocation policy?) to be used as (shim6) identifiers.
Then, a number of years down the line, if the company met certain
criteria they could get an ASN and announce the portable address space
as routing prefix if they desired?  

John