[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space
- Subject: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space
- From: Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu (Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu)
- Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 05:21:46 -0500
- In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 10 Feb 2009 18:03:40 +1100." <[email protected]>
- References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <00de01c98b25$a24b8980$e6e29c80$@com> <[email protected]> <00df01c98b27$3181b7e0$948527a0$@com> <[email protected]>
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 18:03:40 +1100, Matthew Palmer said:
> Considering that RFC1918 says nothing about IPv at all, could that be a
> blocker for deployment in general? That'd also make for an interesting
> discussion re: other legacy protocols (IPX, anyone?)...
I was all set to call shenanigans on this one - except I double-checked the
dates on the RFCs, and RFC1752 pre-dates 1918 by a year...
Not sure what it says about our industry that both RFCs are 13+ years old
now, and we still can't collectively do either one right...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 226 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20090210/27a44430/attachment.bin>