| | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
You're here: Home |
Hi Folks, I just got through reviewing your Internet Draft on 240/4 and we had considered a different path in mind for this prefix with a draft prepared to give it a slightly different meaning ;). We were curious what you thought of allocating 240/4 to public duty for IANA assignment and future public global use. Why do you feel this should be RFC1918 address space instead of allocating it for wider Internet use? Clearly there would be operational hurdles and challenges to consider towards updating filters, code, and possible other nooks and crannies but the net result and added lifetime for v4 might be worth the effort. Looking at the recent allocation history we've seen: 2007 8 /8's (9 minus 1 re-listed as reserved) 2006 10 /8's 2005 13 /8's 2004 9 /8's So this could possibly give us an additional 1-2 years of IPv4 lifetime (hopefully more as the end nears). This would bring the current aggregate number of /8's from roughly 44 to 60 available, an increase of approximately 36% allocatable /8's. Does the need for more private addressing outweigh the need for more public addressing? At a minimum it would be great to add a paragraph addressing this important question. Thoughts? -- Stephen Gill, Research Fellow, Team Cymru http://www.cymru.com | +1 312 924 4023 | gillsr@cymru.com
