Re: [v6ops] Heads up
Christopher LILJENSTOLPE <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ops,gmane.ietf.v6ops |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Ahh, no James. We can multiplex the space. It does mean that there is some potential stranding on the public space, but that is manageable. Chris On 09Nov2010, at 15.50, james woodyatt wrote: > On Nov 8, 2010, at 20:24 , Erik Kline wrote: >> >> Didn't Akira Nakagawa/KDDI present something like this a few meetings ago? I can't recall clearly... > > It was in Chicago, if I recall correctly. At which point Tony Hain joked that we should direct IANA to just turn over the entire remaining free pool for that use. > > Personally, I'd prefer to take Tony's suggestion as a serious proposal. A single /8 isn't enough, is it? For NAT444 to be a really workable architecture, we've got to give over enough addresses that service providers can handle at least a hundred million subscriber addresses in the same address realm, right? > > > -- > james woodyatt <[email protected]> > member of technical staff, communications engineering > > > _______________________________________________ > OPS-AREA mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ops-area > --- 李柯睿 Check my PGP key here: https://www.asgaard.org/~cdl/cdl.asc _______________________________________________ OPS-AREA mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ops-area