[members-discuss] New Charging Scheme
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] New Charging Scheme
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] New Charging Scheme
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sven Olaf Kamphuis
sven at cb3rob.net
Fri Aug 5 16:42:28 CEST 2011
I like the "v6 or die" approach, time for a shakeout :P we can get rid of all the clueless "competitors" (mostly owned by the MAFIAA anyway ;) in one day, by shutting down ipv4 :P bye bye time warner telecom etc :P On Fri, 5 Aug 2011, Brandon Butterworth wrote: >> regarding the ipv4 address space, we've actually tried to announce some >> e-class space over the past days, appearantly, most, if not all, routers >> filter it. > > Interesting, but doesn't matter, v4 is dead, get over it (as you > eloquently explained previously) > >> furthermore, we've found a bunch of legacy ranges, which are not >> announced at all, so if the DoD and IBM would be kind enough to hand >> them over to ARIN/IANA, that would be appreciated > > No, that'd just give people an excuse to put off v6 for even longer. > > v6 or die. > >> don't see why "the prudential insurance company of america" would need an >> /8, clearly they don't see the point of it themselves either, as they >> don't announce a single ip out of it :P > > You're not allocating it to them so it doesn't matter what point > you see. > > Back when it may have been of use I agreed, space allocated for non > internet use could have been considered a different non overlapping > realm and the entire space used on the internet regardless of any > private allocations for non internet use. However that wasn't how it > was chosen to be done and again it no longer matters as it's history > now. > > brandon >
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] New Charging Scheme
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] New Charging Scheme
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]