On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 9:40 PM, Ronald Bonica <rbonica@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > SM, > > At NANOG 54, ARIN reported that they are down to 5.6 /8s. If just four ISPs ask for a /10 for CGN, we burn one of those /8s. > > Is that really a good idea? It's not about good or bad idea, it should be more about; If they can justify having a /10 each then they should get it. And yes, that will hurt. ... wish people could use more time to move on instead of trying to squeeze even more out of the good old, dry and dead dog called IPv4. With all of that said, giving out this shared address space is a horrible idea, but it just a little bit less horrible than the alternates. And yes it will be abused and be counted as yet another RFC1918 space anyway. I know of plenty of people that will be trilled for this space... "woho, no more address collision" while they quiet think "I hope no one else know about this address space...." in other word, move on, give out this space, it'll hurt just a little bit less than the other options. -- Roger Jorgensen | rogerj@xxxxxxxxx | - IPv6 is The Key! http://www.jorgensen.no ; | roger@xxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf