[arin-ppml] IPv6 Non-connected networks

cja@daydream.com packetgrrl at gmail.com
Fri Feb 5 15:11:39 EST 2010


I believe David's definition of a common pool were that they were out of a
block with other similar but "connected to the Internet" blocks not that
they were out of one unique block just for non-connected sites.

---Cathy

On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 12:27 PM, George Bonser <gbonser at seven.com> wrote:

>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net]
> On
> > Behalf Of cja
> > Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 9:29 AM
> > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] IPv6 Non-connected networks
> >
> > I think a common pool is a good idea. It allows these non-connected
> > networks to connect if their needs change and keeps them from having
> > to get another allocation/assingment if they do choose to connect at a
> > later date.
>
> I also believe having non-connected networks out of a common pool is a
> good idea.  For one thing, it allows two networks that are not connected
> to the global Internet to interconnect without worrying about address
> space collisions provided both networks got their addresses from the
> same issuer.   I am thinking of it as a "regionally unique" address
> space.
>
> But if they were to retain those net blocks if they do become connected,
> would that present some problems as holes would then have to be punched
> in the "not connected to the Internet" block filters?
>
> George
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20100205/479e0445/attachment.html>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list