[MLB-WIRELESS] National IP allocation and routing scheme??

[David Arnold]

-->"evilbunny" == evilbunny  <evilbunny at sydneywireless.com> writes:

  evilbunny> Is it really antisocial, or needs driven? 

well.  some thoughts ...

a) we're using rfc1918 space.  this is anti-social in the first place.
   but it has been decided (for melb-wireless), and raising IPv6 again
   won't rescind the decision.  i'd like to minimise the impact (and,
   for example, leaving 10.0/16 unallocated is part of that).

b) since most of the wireless groups seems to be using the 10/8 space,
   and since inter-group tunnels are a potential good thing
   (especially if we're not routing to the Internet, tunnelling might
   give us a critical mass of services), we can either rely on NAT or
   attempt to coordinate address allocations.  coordination doesn't
   seem too hard, and the downsides of NAT are very significant.

c) is there *any* single wireless group in the world that needs 16
   million addresses in the next few years (before it is reasonable to
   move to IPv6) ?  if so, they could possibly argue a "need".  i
   don't think we can.

  evilbunny> obviously if they need that much address space what are
  evilbunny> they supposed to do, likewise if we need the address
  evilbunny> space what are we supposed to do?

given the population of australia, and the number of those prepared to
spend the money required to have an 802.11 node, and the number of
those interested in the medium term ... i think 16 million is a little
more than "need".

64000 seems like too few hosts, but really, it'll probably do for
several years.

250 networks seems very few also, given the popularity of 802.11.  

given these constraints, one option is to forego the possibility of
inter-group non-NATed tunnels, and accept collision in 10/8.  it's
certainly an easy way out.

but until there is really a *need* for it, trying to cooperate seems
to have some benefits ...





d




To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
with "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of the message