Hi Bill, Well, but not everybody is doing that, some people is only accepting /32 (also /35 because the older policy) and of course, anything bigger (we have already one /20). What that means is that just looking at BGP on v6 and comparing to v4, is not fair, and not provide the right picture. Regards, Jordi > De: Bill Manning <bmanning@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Responder a: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx > Fecha: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 17:54:00 -0800 > Para: jordi.palet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > CC: ietf@xxxxxxxx > Asunto: IPv6 -HAS- been deployed -- yawn. > > > On Nov 5, 2004, at 17:17, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: > >> Hi Noel, >> >> Then you should not just look for data, but compare it. For instance, >> when >> IPv4 was initially deployed, how much time took to get some "realistic" >> deployment. >> >> Also remember that in IPv6 only /32 are announced, so you can't just >> compare >> it one to one. >> >> Regards, >> Jordi >> > > now jordi, the party line is nice, but it is clear that the mantra > "only /32s" is > false on inspection and has -NEVER- been true throughout most peering. > granted, you may enforce that at -YOUR- boundary, but don't presume > that to reflect reality. there are at least six prefixes who have a > minimum > injection of a /48 for the "global" Internet and untold numbers of > others > inside walled-gardens. > > --bill > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf