IAB and "private" numbering

Sun Nov 13 17:45:01 UTC 2005

>I don't believe there is a 'rfc1918' in v6 (yet), I agree that it doesn't
>seem relevant, damaging perhaps though :)

So you how would interpret the combination of RFC4913 and the statistical 
analysis known as "the birthday problem"? I offer the interpretation of 
this as use of address space in a limited context that has a likelihood of 
collision at the prefix level with some other similar, but unrelated, use. 
I would characterize a more exact equivalent of RFC 1918 space in an IPv6 
context as use of address space in a limited context that has a certainty 
of collision at the prefix level with some other similar, but unrelated, use.

It would appear that we are already well advanced down a path of 
reproducing many of the aspects of IPv4 address architecture in IPv6, to 
the point of producing analogies of RFC1918 private address space. It also 
seems to me that this entire thread is constructed upon a somewhat dubious 
initial premise, but then again that's not exactly uncommon is it? :-)

   Geoff