[ppml] Policy Proposal 2004-3: Global Addresses for Private N etwork Inter-Connectivity

[Leo Bicknell]

In a message written on Mon, Apr 05, 2004 at 01:09:27PM -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
> huh?  i thought one of the big promises of 2547[bis] was that it
> handled vpns with the same overlapping private space.  now you
> want the world to bear the cost?  gimme a break.

2547[bis] happily handles 10's, or 100's of thousands of overlapping
VPNs.

However, that has nothing to do with the current discussion.

The current problem is what happens when those 10's or 100's of
thousands of /overlapping/ VPN's want to interconnect with each
other.  That's not a technology question.

I'm not going to express a position on if it is prudent for all of
those private IP VPN's to connect to each other or not, but allocating
a /30 per interconnection is likely far more IP conservative than
converting the whole VPN to public IP just because it wants to
connect to 10 other VPN's.

Did you bother to read the several hundred posts on the subject, or
pay attention to the public policy discussion before posting?  Your
opinion is one of the most uninformed I have seen posted yet.  It
assumes a technology that is only tangentially related, and doesn't
address any of the on-point issues.

-- 
       Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request at tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20040407/271badb0/attachment.sig>