IPv6 concern

justin franks <justintfranks@gmail.com> Tue, 22 May 2012 01:12 UTC

Return-Path: <justintfranks@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD4D421F8531 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 May 2012 18:12:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 sjcc06T9xarb for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 May 2012 18:12:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-we0-f172.google.com (mail-we0-f172.google.com [74.125.82.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 603B621F850C for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 May 2012 18:12:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by werb13 with SMTP id b13so2801069wer.31 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 May 2012 18:12:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=A2FzFWhVwcLgB+Ex1vADEhmXcY/C6SSulk3J7ZyYj3A=; b=Z4NQFFGO3AJuQfaeFwxhTi8E+55LY8Hsdgct+sEfVUmDJ5XQqZRd/lX4TGQtR5fkpI AVCSHhdj5NvTp3wwRZfWTvBgsYY37ZIXxeZ8QtzT1P9VWnTERLu4giBLPRMJOw6jHkvj gTdZFep+yCD+24d1pfzfNl0CAboOJjBnwBoAdABDFrF8Y7wXAWq8plugXd4I9M9n+zvF beWCYq438kKdW0gsO9+M5STRLExNcfUpl1OYDYgMq/UupF0gfsiF2z+GErkAEW5mt2IU FIprU5KdrTtSujc6XhOf856nQyXTusJOGwAgxKZnSp048mGFuW44yvYqpPrkpWcPAq/Y b29Q==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.180.78.9 with SMTP id x9mr29754033wiw.18.1337649153797; Mon, 21 May 2012 18:12:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.46.147 with HTTP; Mon, 21 May 2012 18:12:33 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 18:12:33 -0700
Message-ID: <CAMsS2gCFTOZCpZHyUyjMS_+rqznUGxJjkjH8X=fyoLdV44hFfg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: IPv6 concern
From: justin franks <justintfranks@gmail.com>
To: ipv6@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d043bdecea56e3504c095b69e
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 22 May 2012 04:42:54 -0700
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 01:15:22 -0000

Hello,
I am an Internet Engineer. Specifically large scale ISP and Data Center
networks. I understand we need IPv6 and am working towards that as well.
However, I have major concerns about 2 areas in IPv6
1. The BGP prefix filtering
2. The assignment of multiple /32 or /48's to the same Organization by
various RIR's.
I have typed up a brief one page document here that explains some very
valid points.
http://www.inetassociation.com/ipv6subnetdesign.htm

-Justin Franks