Re: Non routable IPv6 registry proposal

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

 



Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote on 20/01/2021 20:06:
The proposal is to reserve a significant block of IPv6 space (e.g. 2002::/16) as non routable address space to be allocated in Class A/B/C sized chunks on a permanent basis either through random assignment or by a new registrar TBD for a negligible one-time fee ($0.10 or less).

this idea was the subject of a recent discussion on 6man, subject thread: "Re-Launching the IPv6 ULA registry". The original email was here:

https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/fFpPHY55pwKlEopyyAZyZI8azg0/

There were several aspects which cropped up, but the core issues seem to be whether the end user needs both address permanence and the requirement for interconnection to third parties. If you need both of these, then registered addresses are a good idea; if you don't need both, then ULA should work fine.

There are options out there for getting formally registered address space at modest cost. It's not 10c once off, but it's not going to break the bank either.

The economics you're proposing may need a bit more consideration, especially given that registries need long term stability, both financial and from the point of view of governance.

Nick




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux