microsoft.com>, Christian Huitema writes:
I did share what I was smoking - it's called 'reality' :).
Which reality? I think Randy is much more realistic!
You are telling us that you want a /10 of private address space set aside b=
ecause you cannot use the current allocation of private address space in RF=
C 1918. You tell us that the effect you want to achieve cannot be attained =
if the address that you use are also used by customer networks. But then, t=
here is no mechanism whatsoever that would prevent customer networks from u=
sing the new /10 as soon as it would be allocated. Sure, you may put text i=
n a RFC somewhere, but that is not a mechanism. Ergo, if we were to make th=
at allocation, it will become unusable for your stated purpose in a very sh=
I think that's not a very good idea. I would rather not see that allocation=
By that logic I call for RFC 1918 to be made historic.
-- Christian Huitema
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka(_at_)isc(_dot_)org
Ietf mailing list