>> Joe Provo wrote :
>> In the part you didn't quote, I pointed out operators have choice.
>
> Teens who smoke marijuana, drink, or take drugs have one, too.
> You are not going to solve the problem by pretending that it does not exist.
> The truth is that operators will go to the quickest or the
> Ronald F. Guilmette wrote :
> Having tried, and failed, to find the RFC that describes and designates
> Industry Standard Squat
> Space, I've come to the conclusion that there isn't one, and that thus, I
> ought to write one.
> I'd like to have it drafted and ready to go by April 1, 2020.
:-)
In message
, Martin Hannigan wrote:
>On the operators using DoD space? Too bad. It happened on 23/8 to me and
>many times. I would get a call and was asked to "make an exception" and let
>someone use a subnet or three while they "figured out what to do". Why
>would I or anyone subsidize another
Ron
This one? https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7249
or this IANA registry .
https://www.iana.org/assignments/iana-ipv4-special-registry/iana-ipv4-special-registry.xhtml
On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 6:50 PM Ronald F. Guilmette
wrote:
> In message
> >, Michel Py wrote:
>
> >It displeases the oper
In message , Michel Py wrote:
>It displeases the operators who have been using DoD space as Industry
>Standard Squat Space.
Having tried, and failed, to find the RFC that describes and designates
Industry Standard Squat Space, I've come to the conclusion that there
isn't one, and that thus, I ou
> On Dec 19, 2019, at 04:03 , hostmas...@uneedus.com wrote:
>
> I see this as an instant headache for a lot of larger network operators who
> are using portions of this DOD space like RFC1918 addresses. Once these
> addresses become public, those operators are going to have to renumber that
On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 10:32:27PM +, Michel Py wrote:
[snip]
> > Joe Provo wrote :
> > Since this list is archived and referenced, rather than let that sit in
> > silence,
> > personally I have to note - there is no such thing as "industry standard
> > squat space".
>
> Joe, this is wishful
> Martin Hannigan wrote :
> On the operators using DoD space? Too bad.
;-)
> Just as ARIN can't set policy to stop squatting, squatters have no rights.
I agree, but unfortunately they have lobbying power.
> Joe Provo wrote :
> Since this list is archived and referenced, rather than let that sit
On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 09:04:20PM +, Michel Py wrote:
[snip]
> It displeases the operators who have been using DoD space as Industry
> Standard Squat Space.
Since this list is archived and referenced, rather than
let that sit in silence, personally I have to note
- there is no such thing
On the operators using DoD space? Too bad. It happened on 23/8 to me and
many times. I would get a call and was asked to "make an exception" and let
someone use a subnet or three while they "figured out what to do". Why
would I or anyone subsidize another network operator? o_0 I received the
space
> Ca By
> Also, the language requiring the DoD to move has been removed from the bill.
> Likely because relevant budget organs of government explained how it is
> fiscally
> impossible to get to ipv6 for them. You can search this archive for one M. Py
> for a template of what they may say about ru
On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 9:44 AM Fernando Frediani
wrote:
> As far as I understand as presented in the URL the text is the one after
> passing on both houses and just lacks President's sanction. As it was
> probably a proposal drafted by the Department of Defense there is no way to
> think that Pr
On Thu, 19 Dec 2019, 13:12 , wrote:
> As I understand it, all purchases since 2008 and all federal networks must
> be IPv6 capable. They should already be close to dual stack, and a sale
> would just involve getting rid of IPv4.
>
> Unlike typical corporate networks, they should already be 99% t
As I understand it, all purchases since 2008 and all federal networks must
be IPv6 capable. They should already be close to dual stack, and a sale
would just involve getting rid of IPv4.
Unlike typical corporate networks, they should already be 99% there, since
all purchases in the last 11 ye
As far as I understand as presented in the URL the text is the one after
passing on both houses and just lacks President's sanction. As it was
probably a proposal drafted by the Department of Defense there is no way to
think that President will refuse it. But I may be missing something on my
readin
I did a bit of looking. The language did appear in House Bill 2500, but
that bill has ONLY passed the House. Those that track bills give it only
a 3 percent chance of passage. That language never made it to passage.
Therefore, it looks like it is going nowhere. The only US federal
governme
Good catch Bill. I had burned more time than I desired digging
through the committee reports
to find this tidbit (Sec. 1088 is Disposal of IPv4):
The House amendment contained a provision (sec. 1088)
that would require the Department of Defense to sell several
blocks of internet protoco
Apparently it was in the House Bill, but was removed in the Senate version, and
didn’t make it through conference.
-Bill
> On Dec 19, 2019, at 14:49, hostmas...@uneedus.com wrote:
>
> I thought the budget bill already passed. Did it contain the IPv4 sell
> provisions or
I thought the budget bill already passed. Did it contain the IPv4 sell
provisions or not? Anyone know what the bill number was, and if it was
signed by the President?
Albert Erdmann
Network Administrator
Paradise On Line Inc.
On Thu, 19 Dec 2019, Ca By wrote:
On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 4:03
On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 4:03 AM wrote:
> I see this as an instant headache for a lot of larger network operators
> who are using portions of this DOD space like RFC1918 addresses. Once
> these addresses become public, those operators are going to have to
> renumber that space. That is 16.9 milli
I see this as an instant headache for a lot of larger network operators
who are using portions of this DOD space like RFC1918 addresses. Once
these addresses become public, those operators are going to have to
renumber that space. That is 16.9 million hosts per block used.
Maybe these operato
21 matches
Mail list logo