Re: [v6ops] 464xlat case study (was reclassify 464XLAT as standard instead of info)

Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> Thu, 28 September 2017 09:58 UTC

Return-Path: <swmike@swm.pp.se>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5236C134629 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 02:58:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.3
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=swm.pp.se
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WzKv6EEy_834 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 02:58:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (swm.pp.se [212.247.200.143]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3333F13462A for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 02:58:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 72C9BB1; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 11:58:46 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=swm.pp.se; s=mail; t=1506592726; bh=f5ktRSTbzuUCTp2FGG5JRUzjO7ODRinBW1NXVZcpaJ8=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=2GlkoX5H/iWRdjyW/Kmal+4a9YbjPBQQfuZApzLkKvBuJU1BKDjCfllAM0qus4sLX J2tsFiljDNIF23bT4XLMrXDr3bhBg6zukAVf43KItN7bbMa7do2Z8fHMUHNrWyKoIe 6rlY3qkrh27RuzSt7Hk3/oSf7C+FY/OVtq7qDR5U=
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70B69AF; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 11:58:46 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 11:58:46 +0200 (CEST)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Alexandre Petrescu <alexandre.petrescu@gmail.com>
cc: v6ops@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <b95785b9-65e9-cf8d-eac3-cc922d7fd59d@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1709281157430.18564@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <LO1P123MB01168388285206BB7C26F029EA7A0@LO1P123MB0116.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <b0b09e49-ad0a-4693-d4d0-1e398f244b5d@gmail.com> <71DC2E77-20D3-4EC8-95B1-96070DA135E7@gmail.com> <b95785b9-65e9-cf8d-eac3-cc922d7fd59d@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
Organization: People's Front Against WWW
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/0_5GIV454uD10s90T71kdplgWYE>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] 464xlat case study (was reclassify 464XLAT as standard instead of info)
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 09:58:51 -0000

On Thu, 28 Sep 2017, Alexandre Petrescu wrote:

> Running out of private space is probably not a reason that a reasonable 
> sysadmin could invoke.  One can not run out of private space.  But one 
> can mis-design a network - yes.

Yet large network providers have said they have this exact problem. For 
instance some with a lot more than 16M devices to manage.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se