Tony Li wrote: > > On Aug 17, 2007, at 4:05 PM, Keith Moore wrote: > >> >>> It seems likely that cable mso's similar will dole out /64's to >>> customers one at a time, I suppose that's acceptable if not necessarily >>> desirable and will probably still result in the use of nat >>> mechanisms in >>> end systems. >>> >> that's COMPLETELY unacceptable. > > > Interesting. Here we have a finite resource with clear, non-zero value > that is being allocated by duly appointed numbering authorities based on > need and then subsequently being allocated to end-users. Where's the > issue? The issue is that IPv6 is architected to give sufficient addresses to end users, and by screwing with this ARIN is harming both deployability of IPv6, manaegability of IPv6, and usability of IPv6 by applications. Protocol design and architecture is not within ARIN's scope. > If something is unacceptable here, its because your expectations > aren't being met. no, it's because they're screwing with protocol design decisions that have already been made, and which they aren't by any stretch of the imagination qualified to revisit. Keith _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf