[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-127: Shared Transition Space for IPv4 Address Extension

Frank Bulk - iName.com frnkblk at iname.com
Fri Jan 21 19:36:52 EST 2011

The problem is that many service providers are using non-
RFC-1918 space device management.


-----Original Message-----
From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
Behalf Of Leo Bicknell
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2011 12:38 PM
To: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-127: Shared Transition Space for IPv4
Address Extension

I realize the desire to not use 1918 space for this comes from the
fact that a customer may also be using 1918 space already and a
conflict causes reachability issues.  In the context of doing this
for say enterprises, that makes sense.

In the context of home users, not so much.  The vast majority of
the home users who buy a Linksys or similar are in a small number
of ranges, e.g. and

Prompting the quesiton, if you figured out what 99% of the home CPE
uses, subtracted from 1918 space, wouldn't you be left with well more
than a /10 from 10/8?  Couldn't you just avoid the parts used by common
CPE and use 10/8 for NAT444?

Yes, you still need to detect and deal with the odd customer who has a
collision, but no solution is free.  If that is rare, it may be a lower
cost to the community than setting aside a /10.

       Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list