[arin-ppml] Use of "reserved" address space.
owen at delong.com
Sun Jun 27 06:10:43 EDT 2010
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 26, 2010, at 6:21 PM, Joe Maimon <jmaimon at chl.com> wrote:
> Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>> Maybe if we had
>> started on this ten years ago it would make sense,
> Agreed. However, the reason we hadnt started on this ten years ago is the exact one quoted above.
>> but now it's far too
> I certainly hope so. Otherwise things have really hit the fan. So I would suggest we do so anyways, even as we assume that time proves it to be a pointless endeavor. I certainly dont want to be having this exact discussion ten years from now.
>> IMHO, it's better to push manufacturers and network providers to
>> IPv6 rather than distract them with yet another hack that will only keep
>> IPv4 rolling along for another year or so.
> What is wrong with an approach of "All of the above"?
Lack of infinite human resources... Resources with clue can do the most good deploying ipv6. Resources without clue won't accomplish much on this task anyway.
> Anyways, strong odds suggest that removing restrictions on reserved space is a much simpler code change than including another network stack, in any OS and in any firmware.
But the other network stack is already there in the vast majority of hardware and os. Additionally, that still has to happen anyway.
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
More information about the ARIN-PPML