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
because you cannot use the current allocation of private address space in RFC
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, there is no
mechanism whatsoever that would prevent customer networks from using the new
/10 as soon as it would be allocated. Sure, you may put text in a RFC
somewhere, but that is not a mechanism. Ergo, if we were to make that
allocation, it will become unusable for your stated purpose in a very short
time.
I think that's not a very good idea. I would rather not see that allocation
being made.
-- Christian Huitema
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf