Re: Non routable IPv6 registry proposal

Nick Hilliard <> Wed, 20 January 2021 23:25 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABFAA3A15D1 for <>; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 15:25:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.162
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.162 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.262, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qJe9gSoPSzmw for <>; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 15:25:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 365133A15D0 for <>; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 15:25:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from crumpet.local ( []) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPSA id 10KNPcLj032263 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 20 Jan 2021 23:25:39 GMT (envelope-from
X-Authentication-Warning: Host [] claimed to be crumpet.local
Subject: Re: Non routable IPv6 registry proposal
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <>
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <>, IETF Discussion Mailing List <>
References: <> <> <> <>
From: Nick Hilliard <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 23:25:37 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.16; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 PostboxApp/7.0.44
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 23:25:51 -0000

Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote on 20/01/2021 21:58:
> So lets say I decide to start up a registry. I write up an RFC 
> describing the answers to the issues you raise and I get FC00::0000/32 
> to allocate on an experimental basis. Worst that can happen is I screw 
> up and lose track of who was allocated what. I can now issue 4 billion 
> /64s before I have to come and ask for more space.
whoa, wait up there!  Either you have a registry or you don't.  If your 
model is ok with long term inaccuracy due to data loss, data rot, or 
cruft accumulation, then the question needs to be asked whether you 
ought to be running a registry to start with.  The whole point of a 
registry is that it provides some level of comfort about resource 
registration accuracy.