Re: [74attendees] The great emphasis on IPv6 - a positive look

[Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr>]

 In your previous mail you wrote:

   Of course. But as Jeroen said, please read RFC3056. The only more-specifics
   under 2002::/8 that make any sense whatsoever are /48, and there would
   *potentially* be about 300,000 of them today, one per announced IPv4 network
   More specifics under 2002::/8 are very much not allowed. Mr R. Bush gave
   us a very hard time about that before RFC3056 was approved.
   
=> unfortunately if someone does it there is nothing we can do (no
Internet police :-). I am afraid one day we regret not have adopted
my proposal to reverse the bits of the embedded IPv4 address, a drastic
way to enforce no spurious injection of the IPv4 mess into the IPv6
routing table...

Regards

Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr