In message
<6(_dot_)2(_dot_)5(_dot_)6(_dot_)2(_dot_)20120209091221(_dot_)082cb2f8(_at_)resistor(_dot_)net>,
SM writes:
Hi Chris,
At 08:57 AM 2/9/2012, Chris Grundemann wrote:
http://www.apnic.net/publications/news/2011/final-8
I am aware of the APNIC announcement. That's one out of five regions.
Are you proposing that every ISP on the planet be given a /10 for
inside CGN use, rather than one single /10 being reserved for this
purpose?
No.
If I am not mistaken, IPv4 assignments are on a needs basis. In my
previous comment, I mentioned that RIRs are still providing unique
IPv4 assignments to service providers that request IPv4
addresses. Even if the IANA pool was not exhausted, it is unlikely
that an ISP would get a /20 due to the slow-start mechanism.
Regards,
-sm
In none of the discussions I've seen has anyone proposed forcing ISP's
to use this space. It is being provided as a alternative, the same
away RFC 1918 space is offered as a alternative.
Today you get ask "have you considered RFC 1918 space?" You can
still get space even if RFC 1918 space would have worked. I suspect
a similar question, will be part of allocation proceedures, for this
space in the future. You need to know that the applicant is aware
of this space.
Mark
--
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
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf