![]() ![]() > Because the RIRs aren't in the business of handing out publicly routable address space. > So.why do you need publicly routable IP addresses if they aren't On Sep 19, 2012, at 5:01 AM, Tim Franklin wrote: Traffic is really only destined for a single node" would seem to be ratherįrom jcurran at Thu Sep 20 14:01:53 2012 "Heavy reliance on broadcast for a wide range of instances where the > enough to declare IPv4 not operational? > So, a single example of IPv4 behaving in a suboptimal manner would be Pining for 240/4 fjords is not a time machine to change the past.įrom trejrco at Thu Sep 20 13:59:39 2012 We have rapidly vanishing IPv4 and no 240/4, IPv6, and no time. It being amusing to grouse about mistakes of the past does not magically change the present. IETF could have realized they were in Epic Fail by Too Clever territory.Īll of these things are water under the bridge now. Operators could have either used larger baseball bats or more participating numbers to make some IPv6 protocol design go the other way. We could also have done other things like a straight IPv4-48 or IPv4-64, without the other protocol suite foo that's delayed IPv6 rollout. We could have started it at a more opportune time in the past. In two or three years we may well regret not having done it in 2005 in seven years we will have had to have solved and deployed IPv6 successfully anyways. The critical failure is that starting RIGHT NOW would deliver five years-ish too late, which renders it a moot point. > Sorry it was a bad idea then, it's still a bad idea.īad Idea or not, stopgap or not, it was and remains technically, programmatically, and politically feasible. Now build a time machine, go back to 2005, and start work. > IPv6-enabled network activity reaches a double digit percentage. > and be well-supported by new equipment, before the percentage of > far, if not for those, it could possibly be reopened as unicast IPv4, > anything at all with 240/4, and given the rate of IPv6 adoption thus > rehabilitated, other than continued immaterial objections to doing > There is still no technical reason that 240/4 cannot be > On Sep 19, 2012, at 9:58 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote: On Sep 20, 2012, at 12:21 AM, joel jaeggli wrote: Subject: The Department of Work and Pensions, UK has an entire /8 at .cz/msg00505.htmlįrom george.herbert at Thu Sep 20 08:18:18 2012įrom: george.herbert at (George Herbert) ![]() And more recently to using the IRRs forĪdditional filtering options. Seems like the genesis has been from a single-rib on the RS Thought I would add some more links (Bird related.). > Finally (plug) we have some resources that may be of interest to you here: Also, it might be send this inquiry to the AfNOG list as well > I'm sure several people on this list have experience with this and will > Quagga documentation even has a chapter on this: > You could do this in a number of ways, running Quagga or BIRD (or even Any form of assistance will be highly appreciated. #Direct url mailman hostgator how toI work at an exchange point and was seeking any assistance on how to implement a software based route server as currently we are using a Cisco Router for that purpose. Subject: IMPLEMENTING A SOFTWARE BASED ROUTE SERVER 0px margin-bottom: 0px margin-left: 0px = ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |