On Feb 16, 2012, at 8:58 AM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
The bottom line for this ID is that address space will be required for CGN,
and rfc1918 doesn't cut it for reasons described in the ID. This means
that the address space must come from somewhere else. The choices are:
1. one or more shared pools allocated by RIRs/IANA/whatever
2. private pools, each of which come from the carriers' own address blocks
3. private pools, independently chosen by ISPs using some method from allocated
space (aka squat space).
option #1 is by definition more efficient than #2.
and option #1 is safer than option #3.
There is no particular reason to allocate this space on a regional basis,
I'd say it would be silly to do so -- what would be the point?
Incidentally, I support this draft.
One implication of draft-weil not being accepted is that it will likely
accelerate IPv4 free pool exhaustion as the folks interested in draft-weil will
simply go out and get blocks from their RIRs while they still can. I will
admit a small part of me finds this appealing as it would end the seemingly
interminable rearrangement of deck chairs on the IPv4 address policy-wonk
Titanic.
Regards,
-drc
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf