The power of default configurations

Thu Apr 7 18:10:37 UTC 2005

Paul Vixie wrote:

>>IMO, RFC1918 went off the track when both ISP's and registries started
>>asking their customers if they have "seriously considered using 1918 space
>>instead of applying for addresses". This caused many kinds of renumbering
>>nightmares, overlapping addresses, near death of ipv6, etc.
>>    
>>
>
>just checking... does that mean you favour the one-prefix-per-asn implicit
>allocation model, or the ipv6 version of 1918 which intentionally doesn't
>overlap in order to serve inter-enterprise links, or what exactly?
>
>  
>
I'm saying that running out of IPv4 addresses would not be such a bad 
thing and because of this should not be unneccessarily delayed.

Pete