Re: [OPS-AREA] Heads up - Plea for allocating a /8 to ISPs

You are correct Rémi. Actually, we are asking for less than the /8
On 11Nov2010, at 19.33, Rémi Després wrote:

> 
> Le 11 nov. 2010 à 11:22, Soininen, Jonne (NSN-FI/Espoo) a écrit :
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I'd like to add a different perspective. We basically have seven /8s left
>> (plus the five that will be given directly to the RIRs when we come down to
>> that number). I think the world expects everybody to be as responsible as
>> possible with those last available /8s.
>> 
>> Taking a /8 to RFC1918bis space means that it is away from global address
>> space use.
> 
> 
> 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.
> 
> RD
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops