Re: stable addressing

[Kurt Erik Lindqvist <kurtis@kurtis.pp.se>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


(slowly surfacing over MD5 passwords)

On 2004-04-20, at 09.55, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:

> On 20-apr-04, at 1:35, Fleischman, Eric wrote:
>
>> For whatever it's worth, my Boeing coworkers and I currently expect 
>> to maintain a Boeing-unique address space in IPv6 (such as we 
>> currently have for IPv4)
>
> If you are in fact acting as an ISP you should be able to get a /32 
> just like any other ISP. If you plan to assign address space to 200 
> "customers" in the next two years you qualify. However, having one 
> large address block isn't always advantageous to enterprises, as this 
> also means that you may receive traffic for locatioon A in location B 
> and vice versa. I know there are people who want their own block and 
> then announce more specifics in different locations but I'm afraid 
> that's not exactly in line with our plans to keep the size of the 
> global routing table manageable.

Not that this question is really on-topic for multi6 but it would be 
interesting to better understand what the requirements for companies 
that insist on their own address space are. "Not being hostage by the 
ISP" is one argument, but that often boils down to readdressing scare. 
However, with many of the id/loc ideas that have been presented here, 
readressing is becomes another issue to what we are used to today. 
Anyone like to bite on this? Perhaps we should take this off-list 
though.


- - kurtis -

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.3

iQA/AwUBQIfUt6arNKXTPFCVEQLQIACfWhzkT8WSN4DV3ygNM3faFexlaWMAnRq8
RSV/W6IwFEV1E1RwTk3+7XX2
=AR8N
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----