Re: Consensus Call (Update): draft-weil-shared-transition-space-request

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

 



On 2011-12-06 22:06, Benson Schliesser wrote:
ISPs need to use addressing within this scope that does not cause (additional)
problems for their existing customers (and their customers' equipment). And in
the event of an addressing conflict, operators (on both sides) need a common
reference to determine who is at "fault" - i.e. who is responsible for fixing
the problem.

Are you suggesting that ISPs MUST use the proposed /10 for CGNs?

That's... interesting. Maybe it could empower customers when an ISP is using something else (e.g. squat space) for its CGN and it's causing issues...

Simon
--
DTN made easy, lean, and smart --> http://postellation.viagenie.ca
NAT64/DNS64 open-source        --> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca
STUN/TURN server               --> http://numb.viagenie.ca
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


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