--On Sunday, September 25, 2011 13:25 -0400 Keith Moore
<moore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Remembering that an ISP who wants to avoid the use of public
>> IPv4 addresses on its backbone/infrastructure has the option
>> of simply converting that infrastructure to IPv6, tunneling
>> public-address IPv4 packets (both its own and those of its
>> customers) over that IPv6 infrastructure using a tunneling
>> approach of its choice. Longer-term, that approach makes the
>> ISP far more IPv6-ready, while "more private/shared IPv4
>> space" is just another dead end.
>
> Yes, but even if it does this (and I agree that it's a
> strategy well worth considering) that ISP is going to need
> IPv4 addresses to assign to its customers until the customers
> migrate to IPv6.
So? I was sort of assuming that an ISP who was aggressive about
converting their internal infrastructure would be freeing up
public IPv4 addresses for endpoint and boundary use in fairly
large quantities. Renumbering shouldn't be a lot harder than,
well, renumbering.
john
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf