|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested
> Just out of interest, why do you think 1918-style space for v6 is > needed? If we could assign every entity who wanted one sufficient non-routable, globally unique space, we wouldn't need 1918-style space. There are, however, three problems with this approach: 1) It encourages massive waste. Perhaps so massive that we would run out of space. 2) There is a cost associated with assigning globally-unique space no matter how you do it. This cost could be too high for some application -- RFC-1918-style space is free. 3) There is a concern that some recipients of this globally-unique unroutable space might use political pressure to get that space routed. This could potentially lead to an explosion of the number of routes in the global table. However, there are huge advantages. Private networks could seamlessly overlay the Internet and each other where desired with no risk of a future merger causing a numbering conflict. I think the first and second problems are solvable. The third problem, however, may be the deal killer. It's a very realistic concern that the technologies we develop and promote can be designed to make things we consider bad easier or harder to do. Technologies can encourage cooperative interoperability or free riding, privacy or interceptability, and so on. DS
|