On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Tim Chown <t...@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
> I agree. That said, an ISP, enterprise or group of organisations can > follow whatever semantics they wish within their own borders. > As long as the RIRs are willing to give them enough address space to do so. If an ISP requested an IPv6 /10 from ARIN because they wanted to give every customer a /48 and wanted to geocode the customer's subscriber ID into the /48, then ARIN would do well to say, "no, sorry, that doesn't make sense". Lest someone not realize this, the draft should clearly state that embedding N bits of semantics into IPv6 addresses causes the network to use 2^N times the address space that it normally would. IMO I think it should also state that although it is an IETF RFC, this model is not necessarily a recommended model, and that RIRs are not obliged to accept this type of address allocation as a justification for obtaining larger address blocks than they would normally be able to obtain.
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
