IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] ULA draft revision #2 Regarding isolated networks

Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> Wed, 28 May 2014 12:40 UTC

Return-Path: <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0C9E1A097B for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 May 2014 05:40:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.872
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.872 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=ham
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 t2S7XG5liM3U for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 May 2014 05:40:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A0BE1A0966 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 May 2014 05:40:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s4SCePej010983; Wed, 28 May 2014 13:40:25 +0100
X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk s4SCePej010983
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=ecs.soton.ac.uk; s=201304; t=1401280825; bh=JArYUxd3anXmB0ypwPiY9uNSF9M=; h=Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=1hSAHaSCu6s4p+KVaZe4gZmsS7u2Gp8sO/CCzIF/jWtUo6HTCD2aZPHIM0eKXDdYM KXOmYqvVpfLx7mnaGbPGY+SgIf9+4z5inMbVGSgFep9HwVyHNqgipr6zEOvW4dBPbB DePJY0ue04uZ5dtSejrD49bO0MmL//ijRyR+1PY0=
Received: from gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk ([2001:630:d0:f102:250:56ff:fea0:401]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102:250:56ff:fea0:68da]) envelope-from <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> with ESMTP (valid=N/A) id q4RDeP0546021927Ql ret-id none; Wed, 28 May 2014 13:40:25 +0100
Received: from tjc-vpn.ecs.soton.ac.uk (tjc-vpn.ecs.soton.ac.uk [152.78.236.241]) (authenticated bits=0) by gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s4SCeOUi001727 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 28 May 2014 13:40:25 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.2\))
From: Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <0ED911FA-D24C-4FC8-9D6A-F38F9711F115@steffann.nl>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 13:40:24 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <EMEW3|1567507d34fbcd6b819dcd8169dd90f8q4RDeP03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|98EB60B3-E979-4CFB-86F9-94F08B2C95E7@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
References: <8AE0F17B87264D4CAC7DE0AA6C406F453D8B6B9A@nkgeml506-mbx.china.huawei.com> <m261ks7xww.wl%randy@psg.com> <53840070.90801@gmail.com> <m2y4xn7wep.wl%randy@psg.com> <53840723.8010606@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr1O_poMR200sjU=ttRvGaeQRkC1ZfXC0Ok4uQxdq3K=NQ@mail.gmail.com> <m2mwe37tbn.wl%randy@psg.com> <CAKD1Yr2t3-vxuG=iDi4biBNFpJwuzuHgfpB74i_uydWWRV7qZg@mail.gmail.com> <8AE0F17B87264D4CAC7DE0AA6C406F453D8B6E02@nkgeml506-mbx.china.huawei.com> <m2fvjv7q4h.wl%randy@psg.com> <m1WpDcc-0000BMC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <43BB867C-7BCA-45F6-8ADC-A49B34D6C0DC@nominum.com> <m1WpHrp-0000BQC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <9DB71B37-999E-4F7F-A7DA-6B243574E818@nominum.com> <2E2EC822-60EB-4B09-8BB3-D8FB098EB181@delong.com> <CD77B261-5F6F-4177-AA50-0B2DD3D15260@nominum.com> <B95BEA59-B1A2-4CEF-ACF4-63F65FB544AA@delong.com> <4FF6E348-6BB5-473A-8E94-4A3EE8BD32DC@nominum.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1405280707260.29282@uplift.swm.pp.se> <0ED911FA-D24C-4FC8-9D6A-F38F9711F115@steffann.nl> <98EB60B3-E979-4CFB-86F9-94F08B2C95E7@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.2)
X-smtpf-Report: sid=q4RDeP054602192700; tid=q4RDeP0546021927Ql; client=relay,forged,no_ptr,ipv6; mail=; rcpt=; nrcpt=3:0; fails=0
X-ECS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-ECS-MailScanner-ID: s4SCePej010983
X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-ECS-MailScanner-From: tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/EyqB5RELwmjZ8Ler4W_KeDkYdDk
Cc: v6ops WG <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] ULA draft revision #2 Regarding isolated networks
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Wed, 28 May 2014 12:40:32 -0000

On 28 May 2014, at 13:38, Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> wrote:

> Hi Mikael,
> 
>> We should spend more time on getting renumbering working properly. Having all Enterprise get PI space will make the routing system melt down.
> 
> Either that, or coming up with a routing protocol that can handle the number of prefixes..

You may still need renumbering tools even without changing provider.

tim

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email