IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: ITU-T Dubai Meeting

"Worley, Dale R (Dale)" <dworley@avaya.com> Tue, 07 August 2012 15:02 UTC

Return-Path: <dworley@avaya.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C951D21F8618 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 08:02:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.269
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.269 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.330, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8yoZhHrA1dAg for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 08:02:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com (co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.13.100]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBF9D11E808E for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 08:02:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EAKQtIVDGmAcF/2dsb2JhbABFuUaBB4IgAQEBAQIBEig/BQsCAQgNCCEQMiUBAQQBDQUIGodlBp5inVyRHGADm0WKD4J7
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.77,727,1336363200"; d="scan'208";a="360732321"
Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 07 Aug 2012 10:57:39 -0400
Received: from unknown (HELO DC-US1HCEX4.global.avaya.com) ([135.11.52.35]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 07 Aug 2012 10:56:57 -0400
Received: from DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com ([169.254.2.202]) by DC-US1HCEX4.global.avaya.com ([135.11.52.35]) with mapi; Tue, 7 Aug 2012 11:01:44 -0400
From: "Worley, Dale R (Dale)" <dworley@avaya.com>
To: "mrex@sap.com" <mrex@sap.com>, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2012 10:58:48 -0400
Subject: RE: ITU-T Dubai Meeting
Thread-Topic: ITU-T Dubai Meeting
Thread-Index: Ac10cL8CGWYk7x7UQ6KhU+HuV40WbwAPGd32
Message-ID: <CD5674C3CD99574EBA7432465FC13C1B22726A0C01@DC-US1MBEX4.global.avaya.com>
References: <5020BF3A.2080903@gmail.com>, <20120807074601.23F871A125@ld9781.wdf.sap.corp>
In-Reply-To: <20120807074601.23F871A125@ld9781.wdf.sap.corp>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2012 15:02:20 -0000

> From: Martin Rex [mrex@sap.com]
> 
> IPv6 PA prefixes result in that awkward renumbering.  Avoiding the
> renumbering implies provider independent network prefix.
> 
> With IPv4, you would have typically keept your IPv4 network address
> (the old class A, B & C from early 199x) even when changing network
> providers.

I've been told that ISPs don't like routing to their customers using
routing-independent prefixes (in IPv4), and that the result is that
small organizations (in practice) use provider address space.
Certainly there would be a problem with routing table size if all
organizations used provider-independent prefixes.

Dale

v2.27.6 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status