North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

RE: 240/4

  • From: michael.dillon
  • Date: Wed Oct 17 17:42:31 2007 
> I'm trying to avoid setting the expectation that 240/4 is 
> just a simple extension to 10/8 and thus people should use it 
> *today* when they run out of space in RFC1918.

I don't believe you.

If you were really trying to "avoid setting the expectation" then you
would be communicating with the authors of
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-fuller-240space-00.txt to see
that the IETF gets their wording right.

This is IETF work and IANA work at this point, not NANOG work.

--Michael Dillon