[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Draft: PI addressing derived from AS numbers

To: RJ Atkinson <rja@extremenetworks.com>
Subject: Re: Draft: PI addressing derived from AS numbers
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 06:26:25 -0800
Cc: Erik Nordmark <Erik.Nordmark@sun.com>, multi6@ops.ietf.org
In-reply-to: <35688674-48C7-11D7-81FE-00039357A82A@extremenetworks.com>
References: <35688674-48C7-11D7-81FE-00039357A82A@extremenetworks.com>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.3b) Gecko/20030210

So what I'm getting from this discussion is that 8+8 is too late but 16+16 is too large??? I would agree that 16+16 is too large. How about 4+16?

Eliot

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Draft: PI addressing derived from AS numbers
  - From: Kurt Erik Lindqvist <kurtis@kurtis.pp.se>

References:
- Re: Draft: PI addressing derived from AS numbers
  - From: RJ Atkinson <rja@extremenetworks.com>

Prev by Date: Re: roadmap
Next by Date: Re: Draft: PI addressing derived from AS numbers
Previous by thread: Re: Draft: PI addressing derived from AS numbers
Next by thread: Re: Draft: PI addressing derived from AS numbers
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread