[this is getting far too pedantic and way off topic for address-policy-wg] bmanning@karoshi.com wrote:
i have problems w/ the term "public [I,i]nternet" - could you please define it?
In such a way that 1) you'd be happy with the definition and 2) we're stay relaticely on-topic for address-policy-wg@ripe? I doubt it. Your ability to pick nits far exceeds the charter of this mailing list - and, indeed my patience for creating water tight definitions. I'm aware of your position on "which [Ii]nternet are we talking about".
- do you want to base your bilateral communications and possibly your business on an something which is frankly unsupported as designed and could stop working at any stage if operator Q were to implement uncontroversial prefix filters?
are you suggesting that party Q is the only option for communications btwn parties R & S?
no, merely that allowing your money and livelihood to depend on something unsupported (as-designed) is not a wise move, imo.
marked by whom? (and wrt 3ffe:: space... folks are still using it and so i still annouce it. it remains useful for them. :)
Why not - if it makes you happy. Incidentally, would you mind if I also announced 3ffe::/24 to my v6 upstreams? Now that 3ffe space is deprecated (and let's not get into the "by whom" argument here), I'm sure you can't have any objections. I could make 3ffe::/24 useful to my peers too, I'm sure. What do you think? After all, sharing is caring.
No argument there. But we're talking about different things. So far, you're talking about connectivity between exactly two specific parties. I'm not.
so your talking about multicast? last i checked, nearly all traffic was unicast; e.g. end to end, e.g. between exactly two specific parties.
no, i'm talking about unicast between R and [A-P][S-Z]. I.e. generic connectivity on the public ipv6 Internet (note calculated use of undefined term) between relatively arbitrary parties also on the same public Internet.
I was thinking more of X = time, Y = % of ipv6 space reachable from ${3ffe}, where 100% at a particular timepoint would be # of reachable prefixes from some place known to be relatively well connected (cue flames for fuzzy specification). Given your reaction to the question, it sounds like you haven't done looked into this, which is a minor pity.
but that is the wrong question. how in the world do you ensure reachability across thousands of ASNs, each of which is willing/able to set their own policies about prefix acceptance?
No idea. Global dictatorship? But policies can be defined which create a network of networks which generally interoperate and interconnect well, and where if you can't get connectivity from point A to point B, that might be considered enough of a problem for the relevant people to want to fix it. That's enough for me.
bill's friend(tm)
thats a new one... :) care to take out a partnership in "Bills Bait & Sushi" ... there are franchise ops available.
In a different world, perhaps. It might appeal to me more if I were of the meat-eating inclination. Do you have any other appealing franchise options? Nick, "you know what I mean"