Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[rpd] Summary of proposals: IPv4 Runout Management

Omo Oaiya Omo.Oaiya at
Thu Nov 10 01:38:25 UTC 2016

On 8 November 2016 at 23:49, Owen DeLong <owen at> wrote:

> > like this one:
> > % Information related to '2001:43f8:1d0::/48'
> >
> > % No abuse contact registered for 2001:43f8:1d0::/48
> >
> > inet6num:       2001:43f8:1d0::/48
> > netname:        WACREN-v6
> >
> > frank at SNET-SNH-DC-P1> show route table inet6.0 2001:43f8:1d0::/48
> >
> > frank at SNET-SNH-DC-P1>
> >
> >> sh bgp ipv6 2001:43f8:1d0::/48
> > % Network not in table
> >>
> >
> > sorry to bring facts into this discussion.
> >
> I am sure wacren has their own reasons as to why some of that v6 is not
> lit.
> But lets not use that as the basis to prove a point.
> Interesting, so when you are casting stones at the ARIN region for
> addresses you assume are not in use because they are not advertised, it is
> relevant, but when someone makes the exact same point in a way that
> reflects poorly on you, then it becomes something that should not be used
> to prove a point.
> This is a very interesting double standard you have brought to this
> discussion.

Hardly a double standard.  Seems you are loosing track Owen.  I brought up
the 34.36 /8s unadvertised in the ARIN region.  576+ million IPv4

Frank is repeating himself and I have already said that we are to undergo
an AFRINIC review so nothing new to add.

FWIW, since some are thumping chests about IPv6 deployments,  I am sure
Tamon and Brice can remember this -
ng/news/unilag-turns-ipv6-after-afrinic-training.  As an aside, a model I'd
recommend for AFRINIC training towards more v6 deployments.

This was in 2010 - 6 years ago.  The university found having to tunnel
through HE for v6 Internet unsatisfactory and turned off the peering.
There are quite a few others like this.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list