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

You are correct, Victor.   The end-user should treat the 444 block just as they would treat other foreign, globally unique blocks as far as security policies are concerned (routing policy, however, would probably want to treat it as bogon).

	Chris

On 12Nov2010, at 03.41, Victor Kuarsingh wrote:

> Jason,
> 
> I would have to disagree with that position.  In our case, it would be
> exactly the opposite.  The non-RFC1918 block would replace public addresses,
> therefore the same class of security policy applies.
> 
> Using RFC1918 (other then the other technical reasons given as to what it’s
> problematic) would require more uplifts of security polices, ACLs, and
> network related configuration.
> 
> I think the points is it is provider by provider dependant.  If the provide
> historically used RFC1918 for addressing, then perhaps in that case it would
> be as you said, but this is definitely not true for providers that current
> supply public space to endpoints (until we run out of course).
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Victor
> 
> 
> On 12/11/10 12:24 AM, "Jason Lin" <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> hi,
>> 
>> Considering currently security policies that have been deployed in the
>> network, the new reserved /8 prefix may lead to not only re-design the
>> security policies, but also reconfigure the related nodes which has high risk.
>> 
>> so, my point is negative.
>> 
>> Jin Yan Lin
>> China Telecom
>> 
>> 
>> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 12:15 AM, Gert Doering <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 04:18:49PM +0800, Rémi Després wrote:
>>>>> But you won't be hurt if some others use this new /8 prefix.
>>> 
>>> Sure.  Someone else might have a good use for a /22 that they can't
>>> get because the last /8 was taken away for NAT444 services.
>>> 
>>> Especially content providers will need small bits of IPv4 space to
>>> provide content to large masses of not-yet-IPv6 capable eyeballs.
>>> 
>>> Against this proposal.
>>> 
>>> Gert Doering
>>>        -- NetMaster
>>> --
>>> did you enable IPv6 on something today...?
>>> 
>>> SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
>>> Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
>>> D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
>>> Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444            USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> v6ops mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> v6ops mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OPSAWG mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

---
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