This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] Re: IPv6 addresses really are scarce after all
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: IPv6 addresses really are scarce after all
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: IPv6 addresses really are scarce after all
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Arnt Gulbrandsen
arnt at gulbrandsen.priv.no
Mon Aug 27 11:10:53 CEST 2007
Hallam-Baker, Phillip writes: > I don't see how such an architectural limitation can be enforced. > There is no way that the IETF can prevent an ISP issuing IPv6 > customers a /128 if they choose. Not directly, but there's the indirect route: a) IETF designs IPv6 autoconfiguration. b) Linksys, D-Link, Netgear and friends make boxes that support autoconfiguration. c) ISP hand out /128s. d) Autoconfiguration doesn't work well. e) Customers call ISP support. f) ISP loses $$$. g) ISP starts issuing /48s instead. I don't know the first thing about how IPv6 autoconfiguration works. It worked very well in my previous office. Will it work better when the router has a /48 at hand than a /64 or /128? Arnt
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: IPv6 addresses really are scarce after all
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: IPv6 addresses really are scarce after all
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]