On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 1:19 AM Martin Hannigan wrote:
> The folks buying up large swaths of previously
> un or underused IPv4 are not using CGNAT.
This is exactly why we need IPv6: to ease the setup of new networks
and to eliminate the financial barrier to entry.
--
Töma
___
On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 12:25 AM Martin Hannigan wrote:
> From my perspective, there is no IPv4 exhaustion or
> shortage. Anyone can get almost anything they need
> on the transfer market.
That depends on the size of your network. Through an abuse-proof
pile-up of resource-exhausting CGNATs, alwa
On Sat, May 18, 2019, 4:06 AM Owen DeLong wrote:
> You’ll also have to rewrite the linux kernel which treats all of
> 127.0.0.0/8 as quasi-automatically configured on interface lo.
>
Yes, things like that are what's implied under "a substantial number of
patches". But this particular one is prob
On Fri, May 17, 2019, 11:40 PM william manning
wrote:
> A much simpler task than repurposing v4 multicast would be to just use the
> exisiting /8 that everyone already has in use. May I present for your
> consideration; 127.0.0.0/8
>
Such a flavor of network engineering sort of assumes one's
On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 1:25 AM Michel Py
wrote:
> http://flent-newark.bufferbloat.net/~d/IPv4%20Unicast%20Extensions3.pdf
Yes! Thanks.
> Cisco has tried too, 11 years ago.
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fuller-240space-02
Also Paul and Geoff, to complete the picture.
https://tools.ietf.org
On Mon, May 6, 2019, 11:08 PM Ronald F. Guilmette
wrote:
> >Impossible. It's disabled in the stack, hard-coded as a martian or a
> bogon,
> >can't even configure it, name it.
>
> Sounds like a software problem.
>
> If your software doesn't do what you want it to do, that's hardly ARIN's
> respons
On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 4:26 PM Keith W. Hare wrote:
> If an organization uses a IPv4 prefix allocated/assigned
> to some other organization (the DoD 30.0.0.0/8 for example)
> within their internal network and filters out all references
> at the edges of their network so that the general public
> n
On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 10:04 AM Owen DeLong wrote:
> At HE, we found a huge uptick in IPv6 sage certifications when we handed out
> T-shirts. Perhaps a “My resources are signed… Are yours?” kind of T-shirt
> might
> help.
This is exactly what APNIC folks actually did in Daejeon this
February, so
On Sun, May 5, 2019, 3:12 PM Carlos Friaças wrote:
> I found out that one, thanks. Time reference was useful. :-)
>
My mailbox is at a peak during the last 2 months, either with lists or PM.
>
Yeah, this is understandable.
I see you mentioned 11.0.0.0/8. I hope this isn't a secret RFC1918 bis
>
On Thu, May 2, 2019, 11:02 PM Carlos Friaças via ARIN-PPML <
arin-ppml@arin.net> wrote:
> > Let's start with an easy one : what do we do with ARIN members who
> hijack DoD space ?
> > It is no secret that 30.0.0.0/8 has become RFC1918 bis.
>
> That's really news to me.
>
Shouldn't have been thoug
On Sat, May 4, 2019, 4:28 AM Marilson Mapa wrote:
> I'm curious why do you not want to let ARIN try to start getting involved
> to help resolve the issue of hijacking?
>
Let's be honest here. RPKI, BGPSec and BGP roles could help resolving the
issue of hijacking. This initiative would tame it
On Sat, May 4, 2019 at 1:31 AM Ronald F. Guilmette
wrote:
> >The Internet doesn't exist, not in any legal sense...
> Now that I know, I'm going to be applying to my landline provider
> (which has also sold me "Internet service") for a BIG refund!
Marketing BS *never* counts as a proper definition
er on behalf of Qrator
Labs, a Czech company outside of the ARIN region and not an ARIN
member.
This e-mail should not be viewed though as supporting for the proposal
itself, at least in the version currently submitted and considered.
--
| Töma Gavrichenkov | CTO | Qrator Labs
| gpg: 2deb 97b1 0a3c
13 matches
Mail list logo
