Re: Heads up - Plea for allocating a /8 to ISPs

> Unless I miss something, the proposal is not at all to add a 4th prefix to the 3 of RFC1918.
> It is only that one /8 be neither in the global address space nor in the private address space of RFC 1918. 
> Thus, ISPs can use it in place of the 10/8 they use today, and thus eliminate conflicts with some of the customer sites that use 10/8.
> One /8 is necessary AND SUFFICIENT to do this.


And won't solve a thing as within days people start using it like it's 10/8. Oh, I'm merging two companies, address conflict, know what let's use XX/8. For more examples, see the work of Geoff Huston and others on the traffic in 1/8. People weren't supposed to use that one as well.

MarcoH
(no hats)
_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops