[ipv6-wg] Hijacking unused address space for a private infrastructure - any legal consequences?
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Hijacking unused address space for a private infrastructure - any legal consequences?
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Hijacking unused address space for a private infrastructure - any legal consequences?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jeroen Massar
jeroen at massar.ch
Thu Feb 24 16:47:54 CET 2022
> On 20220224, at 16:26, Gert Doering <gert at Space.Net> wrote: > > Hi, > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 04:08:45PM +0100, Jeroen Massar via ipv6-wg wrote: >>> People could ask "why not GUA"? The answer is: it is difficult to get yet another /28 GUA from RIR just for the infrastructure. >>> /28 goal has the technical roots by itself. It is the sort of technical solution. >> >> RIR typically give out the space that one really needs. >> >> If you can justify it, you will get it. >> >> If you cannot justify it, you likely do not need it. >> >> As a LIR can get a IPv6 /29 per default (and then likely never have to ask again).... I would be very surprised if one is a large entity that one cannot receive an extra /28. > > If I hear "/28 just for the infrastructure" I'd claim "they are doing > something wrong, in significant ways". > > No network is so big that a /32 wouldn't be enough *for the infrastructure* > (4 billion /64 subnets), unless you start encoding stuff into network > prefixes that should not be there. > > And no, people should not get /28s for (pure) "network numbers are hard" > reasons. Full ack on that. Hence why I mentioned "if you can justify it" :) Greets, Jeroen
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Hijacking unused address space for a private infrastructure - any legal consequences?
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Hijacking unused address space for a private infrastructure - any legal consequences?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]