See my other email. You don't need to use a providers range. ...Skeeve -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Huff [mailto:mhuff@ox.com] Sent: Wednesday, 4 February 2009 8:35 AM To: 'Måns Nilsson'; 'Zaid Ali'; 'Roger Marquis' Cc: 'nanog@nanog.org' Subject: RE: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space DNS is great, but there is plenty of stuff to change that doesn't use DNS (ACLS, etc...). The point is, why should we go through the pain of renumbering, and have to do it everytime our relationship with our ISP changes? We aren't going to go there. It isn't renumbering that's the problem, the problem is that it being tied to an external company. ---- Matthew Huff | One Manhattanville Rd OTA Management LLC | Purchase, NY 10577 http://www.ox.com | Phone: 914-460-4039 aim: matthewbhuff | Fax: 914-460-4139
-----Original Message----- From: Måns Nilsson [mailto:mansaxel@besserwisser.org] Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 4:19 PM To: Matthew Huff; 'Zaid Ali'; 'Roger Marquis' Cc: 'nanog@nanog.org' Subject: RE: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space
--On tisdag, tisdag 3 feb 2009 13.24.59 -0500 Matthew Huff <mhuff@ox.com> wrote:
It's not just technical. Companies are reluctant to migrate to an IP address owned by an ISP. We are one of those companies. If and when it is easy for us to apply and receive our own Ipv6 address space, we will look at deploying ipv6, but not until then. That's not a technical issue, but rather a business decision, and it's not going to change. We aren't depending our network resources on an external third-party, especially given their track record.
Renumbering will happen. Be prepared or cry louder when it happens. DNS was invented for this, and v4 PA space is functionally equivalent to v6 here.
Getting PI space only pushes the inevitable a bit, while lessening the incentives to DTRT wrt IP address mobility.
-- Måns Nilsson M A C H I N A
YOW!!! I am having fun!!!