Hi Nick,
On 24/08/11 1:06 AM, "Nick Hilliard" <[email protected]> wrote: > On 23/08/2011 12:56, Arturo Servin wrote: >> On 23 Aug 2011, at 03:20, Terry Manderson wrote: >>> Just as 169.254.0.0/16 is intended as Not Routable. Do you disagree with >>> that? >> >> No, but you cannot tag this one in IANA IPv4 Address Space Registry. > > I'm not convinced by this ID. The "Routable" column isn't flexible enough > for the IANA v4 allocations list because IANA deals with multiples of /8 Actually IANA deals with any prefix length it is told to by the IETF. The smallest one being a /24 (documentation prefix) the largest one being a /4 ... in IPv4 terms. So far I could not find any RFC which specified in any way what the prefix length of the entry in the IANA registry should be. Certainly the RIRs are allocated in /8 chunks. No denial there. And also given that the IETF reservations vary in prefix length. My guess is that the prefix length selection was arbitrary for parsimony. But if anyone has a specific pointer It would be most appreciated. > (for ipv4 allocations), while individual non-routable prefixes can be as > small as /24. This alone calls into question whether the basic premise of > the draft is worth pursuing. I think it justifies it more. If everything was considered routable, and no differences of prefix length existed then there would be no point. But that just isn't the case. > > Would it not be better to approach this problem from a completely different > direction? E.g. to formally recommend that end users consider everything > routable except address space defined in RFC 3330 + its successors + the > equivalent for ipv6? In a way this draft does exactly that. Just explicitly - and in truth that is always what I thought was the great thing about the IETF. If you are going to write something, or change something - make it explicit. > And then perhaps to put in some scary wording about > the terrible consequences of using address space on your network that has > been assigned to other organisations? > That is a uniqueness point that I'm not addressing. Cheers Terry _______________________________________________ GROW mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
