6bone Prequalification for Sub-TLA assignment (really about addresses)

[Steinar H. Gunderson]

On Mon, Apr 05, 1999 at 04:22:18PM -0700, Seth David Schoen wrote:
>In the old days of IPv4, there was no charge for IPv4 allocations.  (Some
>people I know managed to get portable class C allocations when they were
>fourteen to sixteen years old, without particularly extensive justification
>about what they were going to do with them.  That's how liberal the
>allocations were before the Internet became a household word.)

Unfortunately, this is how things have become now. If IPv4 address delegations
had been planned a little better, I (stupid as I may be) think there would
have been no problems at all. Seriously, IPv4 allows for up to 4294967296
(256 ** 4) addresses, and if they hadn't been giving them out in chunks of 256,
I (being 15 years old, soon 16) wouldn't have needed all the trouble that IP
masquerading gives. (There are still some, but at least things work out OK,
thanks to Linux.)

Therefore I welcome IPv6. The problem (for me) so far with 6bone seems to get
connected for the everyday user. I've got an internal IPv6 network up and
running, but nobody seems to want to give me a tunnel to the 6bone, especially
as I'm connected with my 28.800 modem and have to use dynamic IP. The answer
I get is generally `educational institutions only'. Could anybody help? (I
live in Norway.) Sorry for being a bit off-topic here, but I still feel this
is part of the discussion ;-)

>If everything is done right, there should be no scarcity of addresses, and
>consequently no need to pay for them, and no market for them.

As in the case of IPv4. (Though I've heard something about fragmented router
tables being a problem... Is this why they only give out in 256 and 256?)

/* Steinar */