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

Shared Transition Space VS. BGP Next Hop [was: Re: Best practices IPv4/IPv6 BGP (dual stack)]

Subject: Shared Transition Space VS. BGP Next Hop [was: Re: Best practices IPv4/IPv6 BGP (dual stack)]
From: randy at psg.com (Randy Bush)
Date: Sun, 04 May 2014 07:18:21 +0200
In-reply-to: <CAC1-dtnnqSJtsffxtAQUDc4KVkJQ87fA9urWD_DoViRpES0BwA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAC1-dtkp2rjm=7tARPJNCXjky11u0S_R7xtumSzJ-M4tiNz=vg@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> <CAC1-dtnnqSJtsffxtAQUDc4KVkJQ87fA9urWD_DoViRpES0BwA@mail.gmail.com>

> Ah, so you're in the camp that a /10 given to one organization for
> their private use would have been better than reserving that /10 for
> _everyone_ to use. We'll have to agree to disagree there.

you forced an rfc allocation.  that makes public space, and is and will
be used as such.  you wanted an 'owned' allocation that you and your
friends control, you shoulda gone to the rirs.

randy

Follow-Ups:
- Shared Transition Space VS. BGP Next Hop [was: Re: Best practices IPv4/IPv6 BGP (dual stack)]
  - From: rs at seastrom.com (Rob Seastrom)

References:
- Shared Transition Space VS. BGP Next Hop [was: Re: Best practices IPv4/IPv6 BGP (dual stack)]
  - From: cgrundemann at gmail.com (Chris Grundemann)
- Shared Transition Space VS. BGP Next Hop [was: Re: Best practices IPv4/IPv6 BGP (dual stack)]
  - From: mansaxel at besserwisser.org (Måns Nilsson)
- Shared Transition Space VS. BGP Next Hop [was: Re: Best practices IPv4/IPv6 BGP (dual stack)]
  - From: cgrundemann at gmail.com (Chris Grundemann)

Prev by Date: Paging HP DNS admin
Next by Date: oss netflow collector/trending/analysis
Previous by thread: Shared Transition Space VS. BGP Next Hop [was: Re: Best practices IPv4/IPv6 BGP (dual stack)]
Next by thread: Shared Transition Space VS. BGP Next Hop [was: Re: Best practices IPv4/IPv6 BGP (dual stack)]
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread