IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OPSAWG] [OPS-AREA] [v6ops] Heads up

Dave Thaler <dthaler@microsoft.com> Tue, 09 November 2010 05:53 UTC

Return-Path: <dthaler@microsoft.com>
X-Original-To: opsawg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: opsawg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AD333A68E7; Mon, 8 Nov 2010 21:53:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.474
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.474 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.125, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NMt-psm394a9; Mon, 8 Nov 2010 21:53:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.microsoft.com (mailc.microsoft.com [131.107.115.214]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C72D3A67DA; Mon, 8 Nov 2010 21:53:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from TK5EX14HUBC103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (157.54.86.9) by TK5-EXGWY-E803.partners.extranet.microsoft.com (10.251.56.169) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.176.0; Mon, 8 Nov 2010 21:54:13 -0800
Received: from TK5EX14MLTW652.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com (157.54.71.68) by TK5EX14HUBC103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com (157.54.86.9) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.255.3; Mon, 8 Nov 2010 21:54:13 -0800
Received: from TK5EX14MBXW605.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com ([169.254.5.9]) by TK5EX14MLTW652.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com ([157.54.71.68]) with mapi; Mon, 8 Nov 2010 21:54:13 -0800
From: Dave Thaler <dthaler@microsoft.com>
To: Cameron Byrne <cb.list6@gmail.com>, james woodyatt <jhw@apple.com>
Thread-Topic: [OPS-AREA] [v6ops] Heads up
Thread-Index: AQHLf8Wj/L6fvgCa9UeYMmBoP3TjwZNpEnwAgAAHUgCAAASPgP//hRjg
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 05:54:11 +0000
Message-ID: <9B57C850BB53634CACEC56EF4853FF653436CCD7@TK5EX14MBXW605.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>
References: <B7115C4E-7DA1-40A8-B728-F50E9A46494B@cisco.com> <m2oc9zuow1.wl%randy@psg.com> <9D235370-777A-424D-8465-EBE9ECFA426A@virtualized.org> <4CD8CC62.2030607@gmail.com> <AANLkTin47j6mS1DMR_KhBS_R3f8W7_JDRgKACNigme6c@mail.gmail.com> <F321083F-BD31-42E0-A350-45B8D00372E1@apple.com> <AANLkTinER879ger0fMKxBkzFOQkXtyTy6vjQnUMdR-qu@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinER879ger0fMKxBkzFOQkXtyTy6vjQnUMdR-qu@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 08:09:30 -0800
Cc: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>, "opsawg@ietf.org" <opsawg@ietf.org>, "ops-area@ietf.org" <ops-area@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] [OPS-AREA] [v6ops] Heads up
X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List <opsawg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/opsawg>
List-Post: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 05:53:52 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ops-area-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ops-area-bounces@ietf.org] On
> Behalf Of Cameron Byrne
> Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 1:07 PM
> To: james woodyatt
> Cc: IPv6 Operations; opsawg@ietf.org; ops-area@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [OPS-AREA] [v6ops] Heads up
> 
> On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 8:50 PM, james woodyatt <jhw@apple.com> wrote:
> > On Nov 8, 2010, at 20:24 , Erik Kline wrote:
> >>
> >> Didn't Akira Nakagawa/KDDI present something like this a few meetings
> ago?  I can't recall clearly...
> >
> > It was in Chicago, if I recall correctly.  At which point Tony Hain joked that we
> should direct IANA to just turn over the entire remaining free pool for that use.
> >
> > Personally, I'd prefer to take Tony's suggestion as a serious proposal.  A single
> /8 isn't enough, is it?  For NAT444 to be a really workable architecture, we've
> got to give over enough addresses that service providers can handle at least a
> hundred million subscriber addresses in the same address realm, right?
> 
> I need at least 10x /8s to number my current network, and that does not
> account for growth.
> 
> Verizon Wireless uses 40+ instances of 10.0.0.0/8
> 
> Cameron

The draft was http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-shirasaki-nat444-isp-shared-addr-04

This isn't specific to ISPs either, there's pain any time you're connected to multiple
address domains.  So another example would be the address space used by VPNs.
If it conflicts with the address space of the location you're in, things break.
So I had responded saying there's nothing particularly unique to ISPs here.
If you give a space to ISPs be prepared to give one for other categories as well
such as VPNs.

And if I remember correctly, ARIN had already rejected the 
draft-shirasaki-nat444-isp-shared-addr request, so Chris Liljenstolpe
writing another draft and asking ARIN would seem to be redundant.

-Dave

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email