On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 18:49 +0100, Brandon Butterworth wrote:
Did you mean something like this maybe ?:
Q.E.D.
The RFC seeks to avoid a registry so we end up with the potential for many as a result. May as well have had ARIN do it officially in the first place so there'd only be one.
The RFC provides for two address ranges in fc00::/7, one for random prefixes (fc00::/8), the other reserved for later management (fd00::/8). Sixxs "manages" prefixes from within the random one, there is as yet nothing set up to properly manage the other one. Dunno why ARIN should necessarily manage it; or any particular RIR for that matter. The "random" one allows for swift, bureaucracy-free self-allocation. The more important it is to you that your allocation be unique, the more careful you will be to choose a truly random one. The chance that any random prefix will conflict with any chosen prefix is very, very small. The chance that two conflicting prefixes would belong to entities that will ever actually interact is even smaller. Makes it an interesting question as to whether the managed range is really necessary at all. Regards, K. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Karl Auer (kauer@biplane.com.au) +61-2-64957160 (h) http://www.biplane.com.au/~kauer/ +61-428-957160 (mob) GPG fingerprint: B386 7819 B227 2961 8301 C5A9 2EBC 754B CD97 0156 Old fingerprint: 07F3 1DF9 9D45 8BCD 7DD5 00CE 4A44 6A03 F43A 7DEF