> Owen DeLong wrote : > Operating an IPv6-only network is actually a lot simpler than operating an > IPv4-capable network. The only draw-back > being the inability to reach the fraction of the internet that has not yet > deployed working IPv6.
Which, after 15 years, still is 90%. There was a lot of FUD about IPv4 shortage, and all that FUD has done is to accelerate people hoarding IPv4 addresses to have them available now. If we accelerate the shortage of 2-byte ASNs, everyone is going to find a good reason to hoard them and deny access to the new players in 5 years. This is the exact situation we have with IPv4. Got some when it was easy ? Good, now there is a new market as renting PA space and newcomers are left with that. It did not help IPv6 being deployed, just made the organizations who had extra IPv4 happy. Do you want to do the same with 2-byte ASNs ? I support keeping things as they are : give a 4-byte ASN by default, give a 2-byte ASN to those who have a good reason to need one. Let's not make more FUD, let's look at reality. Can one operate a new IX with a 4-byte ASN ? So far nobody but me has posted a single line of config for any platform detailing why or why not. Michel. _______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
