[arin-ppml] Opposed to 2010-9 and 2010-12
jmaimon at chl.com
Sun Oct 10 14:53:16 EDT 2010
Owen DeLong wrote:
> On Oct 10, 2010, at 9:49 AM, Joe Maimon wrote:
>> What about traffic engineering? It would be a lot nicer if return trip to my users could deterministically stay within region.
> Permit me to rephrase... There is nothing that in my mind would justify the community
> granting more than one 6rd prefix to an ISP, given the incredible waste inherent in the
> first one. I would advocate that, instead, if you want to do TE with your 6rd, you should,
> as an ISP, either disaggregate your 6rd prefix accordingly, or, you should move towards
> a more native solution where you could get appropriate native allocations with much
> less wastage.
We agree. My point was that 6rd can open the door to even larger than
/16 allocations. And all because of the excellent idea to store protocol
dataset inside of ipv6 128 bits of register^W address space. TE bits
would come on top of that.
More information about the ARIN-PPML