[arin-ppml] Ending point to point links as a justification for a /30?

Ted Mittelstaedt tedm at ipinc.net
Sat Jul 31 17:37:25 EDT 2010

On 7/29/2010 11:34 AM, William Herrin wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 5:21 AM, Joe Maimon<jmaimon at chl.com>  wrote:
>> William Herrin wrote:
>>> I don't think we even give 'em point to point links. For the last /8
>>> the vendors can damn well fix their code to originate ICMP from the
>>> loop0 address instead of the RFC1918 address on the interface.
>> I completely agree. That feature would be really lovely along with other
>> control plane traffic handling improvements and wider availability of proper
>> address abstraction off of the physical interface.
> How much support would there be for a policy proposal to exclude point
> to point links as a justification for any global IP addresses
> effective, say, 1/1/2012? Along with a stern recommendation from ARIN
> to the routing vendors that they update their software to prevent the
> non-availability of of addresses for point to point links from causing
> malfunctions with ICMP warnings and errors?

None from me.

We want the smaller providers to upgrade to IPv6 - for
quite a lot of them, that means throwing away working routers and
replacing them with working routers that have more ram and newer
firmware that supports IPv6.  They cannot afford or justify doing
this with new gear but we might get them to do it with used gear.

But you are NOT going to find affordable routers on the secondary
market that support some brand-new "fixed" code that uses the loop
address.  You can find affordable ones that support IPv6 but that's
probably going to be about it.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list