Below with [DT] -----Original Message----- From: Marc Blanchet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 6:41 AM To: Dave Thaler Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [Int-area] ISP Shared Address QA
Dave Thaler a écrit : >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> Behalf Of Akira Nakagawa >> Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 6:45 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: [Int-area] ISP Shared Address QA >> >> >> All, >> >> This is Akira Nakagawa, Tokyo. >> > >> (Q7) ISP Shared address will be used by end users. >> >> (A7) Same case happens nowadays. If end users use Global Address block >> that >> is same block as ISP's Global address block, address blocks will >> duplicate. > > You didn't mention my comment in your list below. > > (Q9) ISPs aren't special. Corporate VPNs have the same problem with > conflicting space, for example. (I believe there are other examples > but VPN's are the most well known.) If ISPs get a space, then so > should VPNs and various other things. > Dave, I think this point is covered in Q7 above. [DT] It's not covered by Q7 above. Q7 above is about whether a possible space given to ISPs will work or not. Q9 is about whether we should give a space to ISPs, whether we should give another space to VPNs, whether we should give another space to every other class of network for which there exist many instances. Q9 is saying that we should not do so for ISPs unless we also are willing to do so for all the others. -Dave Marc. -- ========= IPv6 book: Migrating to IPv6, Wiley, 2006. http://www.ipv6book.ca Stun/Turn server for VoIP NAT-FW traversal: http://numb.viagenie.ca _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
