[ppml] Revising Centrally Assigned ULA draft
David Conrad
drc at virtualized.org
Mon Jun 18 14:32:47 EDT 2007
- Previous message: [ppml] Revising Centrally Assigned ULA draft
- Next message: [ppml] Revising Centrally Assigned ULA draft
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Stephen, On Jun 17, 2007, at 6:22 PM, Stephen Sprunk wrote: >> What do you see as the incentive that will be driving the shift to >> the "loc/id split"? > > Failure of routers to handle the number of identifiers being handed > out. Wouldn't the more natural reaction to this be route filtering? I'll admit that I have some skepticism that the Internet community is going to spend the money necessary redeploy IPv6, particularly as the need for that redeployment would be the success of IPv6. I used to be a strong proponent of a loc/id split, but have pretty much given up since it seems people far smarter than me argue there isn't really a problem. > The current consensus criteria for "deserving" a routing slot can > be found in the NRPM. Is it just me or is there appears to be a disconnect here: - On the one hand, we're told that routers can today handle an order of magnitude more "routing slots" and over the long term, can handle oodles more and that the RIRs don't do "routability". - On the other hand, ARIN policies are oriented towards conserving "routing slots" and people are proposing fairly obscene hacks to obtain address space that won't (at least in theory) consume "routing slots". It's probably just me... Rgds, -drc
- Previous message: [ppml] Revising Centrally Assigned ULA draft
- Next message: [ppml] Revising Centrally Assigned ULA draft
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the PPML mailing list