> On Nov 22, 2021, at 02:45 , Masataka Ohta
> wrote:
>
> Mans Nilsson wrote:
>
> > Not everyone are Apple, "hp"[0] or MIT, where initial
> > allocation still is mostly sufficient.
>
> The number of routing table entries is growing exponentially,
> not because of increase of the number of
> On Nov 21, 2021, at 1:20 PM, William Herrin wrote:
>
> On Sun, Nov 21, 2021 at 4:16 AM Eliot Lear
> wrote:
>> In 2008, Vince Fuller, Dave Meyer, and I put together
>> draft-fuller-240space, and we presented it to the IETF. There were
>> definitely people who thought we should just try to
On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 1:21 PM John Gilmore wrote:
> We have found no ASIC IP implementations that
> hardwire in assumptions about specific IP address ranges. If you know
> of any, please let us know, otherwise, let's let that strawman rest.
>
There's at least one. Marvell PresteriaCX (its
Randy will be presenting draft-ymbk-sidrops-rov-no-rr during RIPE-83, at
around 1530hrs UTC:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ymbk-sidrops-rov-no-rr-02
Most grateful if you can join, and provide some initial feedback. Thanks.
Mark.
Mans Nilsson wrote:
> Not everyone are Apple, "hp"[0] or MIT, where initial
> allocation still is mostly sufficient.
The number of routing table entries is growing exponentially,
not because of increase of the number of ISPs, but because of
multihoming.
As such, if entities requiring IPv4
J. Hellenthal wrote:
> FreeBSD operators have been using this space for quite a long time for
> many NAT'ing reasons including firewalls and other services behind
> them for jail routing and such.
>
> https://dan.langille.org/2013/12/29/freebsd-jails-on-non-routable-ip-addresses/
>
> That's just
Hi John,
On 22.11.21 10:25, John Gilmore wrote:
Eliot Lear wrote:
I was not in this part of IETF in those days, so I did not participate
in those discussions. But I later read them on the archived mailing
list, and reached out by email to Dave Thaler for more details about his
concerns. He
Eliot Lear wrote:
> In 2008, Vince Fuller, Dave Meyer, and I put together
> draft-fuller-240space, and we presented it to the IETF. There were
> definitely people who thought we should just try to get to v6, but
> what really stopped us was a point that Dave Thaler made: unintended
> impact on
>We have 10,000+ customers and by default everyone is behind CGNAT. Around 25
>customers have asked for a dedicated public IP
>address and we usually just give them one free of charge. For our case, very
>low percentage actually request one.
> Travis
Out of curiosity, based on your
Subject: FreeBSD users of 127/8 Date: Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 12:57:43AM -0800
Quoting John Gilmore (g...@toad.com):
> If it turns out that FreeBSD usage of 127.1/16 is widespread, and the
> above analysis is incorrect or unacceptable to the FreeBSD community, we
> would be happy to modify the
Hi all,
Do any of your websites employ password-based logins? Do they also use a
CDN service? Are you concerned about the security of users' passwords? Are
there any measures to protect users' sensitive information?
Many websites we investigated so far send users' account credentials
directly to
11 matches
Mail list logo
