IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations - work or abandon?

Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> Thu, 12 November 2015 19:37 UTC

Return-Path: <owen@delong.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 3A9EB1B32AF for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 11:37:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.111
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.111 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-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 Ily5sfKMIAWS for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 11:37:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from owen.delong.com (owen.delong.com [192.159.10.2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B9261B32AE for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Nov 2015 11:37:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from delong-dhcp229.delong.com (delong-dhcp29 [192.159.10.229]) (authenticated bits=0) by owen.delong.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id tACJa6kU032053 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 12 Nov 2015 11:36:07 -0800
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\))
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <20151112184613.GZ89490@Space.Net>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 11:36:06 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <03C04D1B-86D1-4A5A-A8D3-7508CEC80DE9@delong.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1511050424410.1055@moonbase.nullrouteit.net> <20151106.063106.74659839.sthaug@nethelp.no> <CAO42Z2x3O8A1XKqN3PTcvM=xpF8W_WNSL1rVhHQ4ZY5HbVG=OQ@mail.gmail.com> <20151106.081425.74651560.sthaug@nethelp.no> <6ED54502-C5D1-4D09-877C-FE283E3EF142@delong.com> <20151112184613.GZ89490@Space.Net>
To: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/daCk9-qWr_XgtHaxglo3xrS9B9M>
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations - work or abandon?
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: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 19:37:11 -0000

> On Nov 12, 2015, at 10:46 , Gert Doering <gert@space.net> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 10:32:34AM -0800, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> How is a /48 PI hard to acquire? Where?
>> 
>> I know it???s utterly simple in the ARIN region.
>> To the best of my knowledge, it is fairly simple in RIPE.
>> It???s utterly easy in APNIC, though somewhat expensive IMHO.
>> I believe it is fairly easy in LACNIC.
>> To the best of my knowledge, it is not difficult or expensive in AfriNIC.
>> 
>> Please explain exactly what circumstances make it too difficult for any company
>> to acquire a /48 PI as I would consider this a brokenness in the relevant RIR???s
>> policy and would happily work to resolve the issue.
> 
> The IETF world does not (at least "should not") revolve around "companies",
> and I wish you good luck finding a SoHo ISP that will route your PI space.
> 
> IOW, having a /48 PI space is nice, but if that does not have Internet
> connectivity, how exactly does it differ from ULA?

2620:0:930::/48

Q.E.D.

Owen

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email