Re: draft-ietf-nat-protocol-complications-02.txt

[David R. Conrad]

Steve,

> I interpreted Bill's question as how would this be different
> than limiting IPv4 prefix advertisements to only /8s *today*, i.e., without
> renumbering the IPv4 Internet, so I answered accordingly.  I didn't think
> to interpret the question the way you did, because the answer is so obvious
> it wouldn't have made sense to ask.

Perhaps it is obvious to you, however it has been implied that one of the
advantages of v6 is that it has a limited number of TLAs which would be found
the the DFZ of the v6 Internet.  My point was that this is not an advantage of
v6 but rather an advantage of starting fresh and that the limitations on TLAs
is not an artifact of the v6 protocol, but rather an administrative limit
established by policy -- something quite malleable over time (perhaps more so
now given the creation of ICANN).

> IPv4 could in theory have 2^32 TLAs and IPv6 could in theory have
> 2^128 TLAs.  Are you saying that 2^32 TLAs would be OK?

No more than I would assume you'd say 2^128 TLAs would be OK.
 
Rgds,
-drc