IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-colitti-v6ops-host-addr-availability-01.txt

Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com> Tue, 28 July 2015 18:48 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
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 14FEC1B2D8E for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Jul 2015 11:48:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.909
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 tBSjsJpdVOg9 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Jul 2015 11:48:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sjc1-mx02-inside.nominum.com (sjc1-mx02-inside.nominum.com [64.89.234.25]) (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 17FBB1B2CA5 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Jul 2015 11:48:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-03.win.nominum.com [64.89.235.66]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certificate Authority - G2" (verified OK)) by sjc1-mx02-inside.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2D83DA008B; Tue, 28 Jul 2015 18:48:25 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [10.0.20.178] (71.233.41.235) by CAS-03.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (192.168.1.100) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.224.2; Tue, 28 Jul 2015 11:48:25 -0700
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_021BAB8E-C250-43DB-B1F5-5214E3CE3A80"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2102\))
From: Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <55B7CBB9.2050107@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 14:48:24 -0400
Message-ID: <730AF1E1-F435-4EE2-877A-A46B8A90AA4D@nominum.com>
References: <20150723130715.12113.47480.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <55B1ED14.6030501@gmail.com> <m1ZIZ4w-0000CbC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <CAKD1Yr2z6T86gmQMPZwbgFB4mdt7=xWNuei5jaQg=vpG7-zLVg@mail.gmail.com> <m1ZJdjZ-0000CcC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <20150727091241.GL84167@Space.Net> <m1ZJfOr-0000CgC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <C9C3FBC4-44F3-45D2-B8C4-3725396E5D40@nominum.com> <CAPi140Mx96dBgeaCkrsDD+-J85OZDo5Di+gHTBiaGDzYK2us4w@mail.gmail.com> <20150728115944.GZ84167@Space.Net> <CAPi140PKh64L=nr96pv3dn7FO_Y9pW162YzBT8kZHSMsedGYtQ@mail.gmail.com> <BE811683-3BBA-40F0-B047-282DA7E774AA@nominum.com> <CAKD1Yr3pHBRk+BTOJOOSC=c6M4FNaumGEKwHvFW=ThED7M744g@mail.gmail.com> <4AB2ED61-23CF-40D5-B2A6-F1F4064EC0C6@nominum.com> <CAKD1Yr3-omr_M7pU9TgoECGnTGf-ta64UcE8ddbAom-rB8exZA@mail.gmail.com> <55B7CBB9.2050107@gmail.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2102)
X-Originating-IP: [71.233.41.235]
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/F4_jStM_UZW6cg5OcOEvibHE_cU>
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-colitti-v6ops-host-addr-availability-01.txt
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: <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: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 18:48:27 -0000

On Jul 28, 2015, at 2:36 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> Not to mention encountering the problems with /120 mentioned
> in RFC 7421, which include the problems of only having a /24 in
> IPv4. We should be past that.

To be clear, I wasn’t proposing /120 prefixes, but the delegation of /120 prefixes as a way of delivering a chunk of contiguous addresses smaller than a /64, which I continue to think is impractical for Lorenzo’s use case.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email