IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Thinking differently about the site local problem (was: RE: site local addresses (was Re: Fw: Welcome to the InterNAT...))

John C Klensin <john@jck.com> Tue, 01 April 2003 15:08 UTC

Received: from ran.ietf.org (ran.ietf.org [10.27.6.60]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA17068; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 10:08:41 -0500 (EST)
Received: from majordomo by ran.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.10) id 190NW6-0000Tv-00 for ietf-list@ran.ietf.org; Tue, 01 Apr 2003 10:17:38 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([10.27.2.28] helo=ietf.org) by ran.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 1905K9-0006dp-00 for ietf@ran.ietf.org; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 14:52:05 -0500
Received: from bs.jck.com (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA20185 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 14:35:40 -0500 (EST)
Received: from [209.187.148.215] (helo=p3.JCK.COM) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 19056O-00057i-00; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 14:37:52 -0500
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2003 14:37:52 -0500
From: John C Klensin <john@jck.com>
To: Bill Manning <bmanning@ISI.EDU>, Margaret Wasserman <mrw@windriver.com>
cc: "alh-ietf@tndh.net" <alh-ietf@tndh.net>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Thinking differently about the site local problem (was: RE: site local addresses (was Re: Fw: Welcome to the InterNAT...))
Message-ID: <243461298.1049121472@p3.JCK.COM>
In-Reply-To: <200303311701.h2VH1h615515@boreas.isi.edu>
References: <200303311701.h2VH1h615515@boreas.isi.edu>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.0.3 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-ietf@ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


--On Monday, 31 March, 2003 09:01 -0800 Bill Manning 
<bmanning@ISI.EDU> wrote:

> 	Is may be worth noting that RIRs have -NEVER- made
> presumptions 	on routability of the delegations they make.

I believe that, although I remember some arguments within ARIN 
back when I was on the AC about whether it was legitimate or 
rational to make allocations that were believed to be 
unroutable.   But I've gotten several private notes that lead me 
to believe that a lot of the community doesn't believe this or, 
more specifically, believes that everyone will fall into line 
and route any delegation that an RIR makes directly and, hence, 
that any RIR allocation will, de facto, become routable.

     john

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email