[address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] Policy for allocation of IPv6 address space from IANA to RIRs
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] Policy for allocation of IPv6 address space from IANA to RIRs
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] Policy for allocation of IPv6 address space from IANA to RIRs
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Pim van Pelt
pim at ipng.nl
Tue Aug 10 11:26:57 CEST 2004
On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 10:16:25AM +0200, Gert Doering wrote: | Hi, | | On Mon, Aug 09, 2004 at 05:38:03PM +0200, leo vegoda wrote: | > http://www.ripe.net/ripe/draft-documents/ipv6.html | | Very reasonable draft. I agree. I have two questions though; 1. Are there no expectations on having more RIRs in the lifespan of the 001 segment of IPv6 space ? ie, will we run out of reserved blocks ? I am very worried we may indeed run out. 2. What's the purpose of "various". Please give some detail about what can and can not fit into this /6. I think that reserving /8s is better than /6s. The DNS issue is one thing, the scalability question in (1) is another. A /8 should be enough for a RIR in the midterm future, if a RIR explodes (IP space wise) they can always be plugged into another /8 in the future. I think this will be a more stable situation than scaling down from /6s to /7s (as Gert suggested). -- ---------- - - - - -+- - - - - ---------- Pim van Pelt Email: pim at ipng.nl http://www.ipng.nl/ IPv6 Deployment -----------------------------------------------
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] Policy for allocation of IPv6 address space from IANA to RIRs
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] Policy for allocation of IPv6 address space from IANA to RIRs
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]