Re: [v6ops] Heads up - Plea for allocating a /8 to ISPs

That's one possible place.

	Chris

On 15Nov2010, at 12.05, Richard Hartmann wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 19:02, David Conrad <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> No, I meant 44/8.  I am aware that it is in use by a few ham operators,
>> however I would think they given the sparseness of usage, those ham
>> operators could renumber in other parts of 44/8, freeing up a block of
>> sufficient size for your purposes.
> 
> FWIW, 44.200.0.0/13 is unused. Renumbering is not realistic, but they
> have enough sparseness in the upper ranges not to need 44.200.0.0/13,
> ever. I would say asking can't hurt though I am still not sure if
> NAT444 is a good idea.
> 
> 
> Richard
> 

---
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