<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace">This part of the proposal doesn't have in mind the operations of a network:</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace">> <span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"> A. Disable the program codes in current routers that have been disabling the use of the 240/4 NetBlock. The cost of this software engineering should be minimal.</span></div><br><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace">Yes, let's say that the cost for Vendor A could be minimal: they will remove some lines in the code for version X.Y and release version X.Y-EzIP without bugs triggered by removing those lines. Then, we, the operators, would have to plan the upgrade of all of our routers, spend days programming the upgrade, spend nights in maintenance windows, maybe pay for remote hands, etc., just to extend for a few more days the inevitable agony of IPv4.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace">Thus, the cost of the so-called EzIP is not minimal.</div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Mar 12, 2022 at 3:32 AM Fernando Frediani <<a href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com">fhfrediani@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<p>Hello</p>
<p>I do not and never accepted the easy justification that working
towards making any usage of a huge amount of wasted IPv4 addresses
due to an historical mistake from some network vendor is something
that would compete with IPv6 deployment. Both things can work in
parallel without prejudice to each other.<br>
</p>
<p>However I think the best proposal I have seen was the one put but
Seth and his partners
(<a href="https://github.com/dtaht/unicast-extensions/blob/master/rfcs/draft-gilmore-taht-v4uniext.txt" target="_blank">https://github.com/dtaht/unicast-extensions/blob/master/rfcs/draft-gilmore-taht-v4uniext.txt</a>)
and even though these addresses may not be used globally they will
have usage that can help making this transition smoother as it is
not reasonable to think we will turn the key to IPv6 in the next
few years for more effort and dedication we put into it.</p>
<p>Fernando<br>
</p>
<div>On 12/03/2022 04:47, JORDI PALET
MARTINEZ vía LACNOG wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt" lang="EN-US">Personally, I don’t think it is worth and I’m
not going to invest more time in discussing this, just a
short note for others to consider:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt" lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt" lang="EN-US">The effort to “reinvent” any part of IPv4 or
patches to it, then test that everything keeps working as
expected, versus the benefits and gained time, it is much
best invested in continue the IPv6 deployment which is
already going on in LAC and the rest of the world.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt" lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black" lang="EN-US">It would
not make sense, for a region like LAC to trow away all the
efforts that have been already done with IPv6 and we
should avoid confusing people.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black" lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black" lang="EN-US">IPv6 is
the only viable long-term solution, and this is the reason
why what you are proposing and similar approaches have
been rejected several times by IETF.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black" lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black" lang="EN-US">Saludos,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black" lang="EN-US">Jordi<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black" lang="EN-US">@jordipalet<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black" lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt" lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt" lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt">El 12/3/22
5:56, "LACNOG en nombre de Abraham Y. Chen" <<a href="mailto:lacnog-bounces@lacnic.net" target="_blank">lacnog-bounces@lacnic.net</a>
en nombre de <a href="mailto:aychen@avinta.com" target="_blank">aychen@avinta.com</a>>
escribió:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">Dear Colleagues:</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">0)
I was made aware of a recent discussion on this Forum that
cited our work on the 240/4 NetBlock, nicknamed EzIP
(Phonetic for Easy IPv4). (Please see, at the end of this
MSG, the URL to the discussion and the highlighted text
where the citation was made.)</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">1)
As the lead investigator of the EzIP Project, I would like
to formally introduce our solution by bringing your
attention to an overview whitepaper:</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">
English: <a href="https://www.avinta.com/phoenix-1/home/RevampTheInternet.pdf" target="_blank">https://www.avinta.com/phoenix-1/home/RevampTheInternet.pdf</a></span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">
Spanish: <a href="https://www.avinta.com/phoenix-1/home/RevampTheInternet_ES.pdf" target="_blank">https://www.avinta.com/phoenix-1/home/RevampTheInternet_ES.pdf</a></span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">
Portuguese: <a href="https://www.avinta.com/phoenix-1/home/RevampTheInternet_PT.pdf" target="_blank">https://www.avinta.com/phoenix-1/home/RevampTheInternet_PT.pdf</a></span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">
In a nutshell, EzIP proposes:</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">
A. Disable the program codes in current routers that
have been disabling the use of the 240/4 NetBlock. The
cost of this software engineering should be minimal. </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">
B. The EzIP deployment architecture is the same as that
of the existing CG-NAT (Carrier Grade Network Address
Translation). Consequently, there is no need to modify any
hardware equipment. </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">
There is an online setup description called RAN (Regional
Area Network), (Reference II), that demonstrates the
feasibility of this approach.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">2) There are additional
consequential benefits by deploying EzIP, such as those
mentioned by our comment to Reference III in the above
whitepaper.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">I
look forward to addressing your thoughts.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span style="font-size:13.5pt"><br>
Regards,</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">Abe (2022-03-08 09:22 EST)<br>
VP Engineering<br>
Avinta Communications, Inc.<br>
Milpitas, CA 95035 USA</span><br>
<span style="font-size:13.5pt">+1(408)942-1485</span><br>
<span style="font-size:13.5pt">Skype: Abraham.Y.Chen</span><br>
<span style="font-size:13.5pt">eMail: <a href="mailto:AYChen@Avinta.com" target="_blank">AYChen@Avinta.com</a></span><br>
<span style="font-size:13.5pt">WebSite: <a href="http://www.Avinta.com" target="_blank">www.Avinta.com</a></span>
<u></u><u></u></p>
<p style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p style="margin-left:35.4pt">*****************<u></u><u></u></p>
<p style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">
<a href="https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/lacnog/2021-November/008895.html" target="_blank">https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/lacnog/2021-November/008895.html</a></span><u></u><u></u></p>
<h1 style="margin-left:35.4pt">[lacnog] Draft: Unicast Use of
the Formerly Reserved 127/8 <u></u><u></u></h1>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><b>Leandro
Bertholdo</b> <a href="mailto:lacnog%40lacnic.net?Subject=Re%3A%20%5Blacnog%5D%20Draft%3A%20Unicast%20Use%20of%20the%20Formerly%20Reserved%20127/8&In-Reply-To=%3C86B6BC4D-1D2B-406A-978B-09F459FBD585%40penta.ufrgs.br%3E" title="[lacnog] Draft: Unicast Use of the Formerly
Reserved 127/8" target="_blank">berthold en
penta.ufrgs.br </a><br>
<i>Lun Nov 29 07:15:28 -03 2021</i> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:71.4pt"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Symbol"><span>·<span style="font:7pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span></span>Mensaje
anterior: <a href="https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/lacnog/2021-November/008894.html" target="_blank">[lacnog] Draft: Unicast Use of the
Formerly Reserved 127/8 </a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:71.4pt"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Symbol"><span>·<span style="font:7pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span></span>Próximo
mensaje: <a href="https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/lacnog/2021-November/008888.html" target="_blank">[lacnog] Draft: Unicast Use of the
Formerly Reserved 127/8 </a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:71.4pt"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Symbol"><span>·<span style="font:7pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span></span><b>Mensajes
ordenados por:</b> <a href="https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/lacnog/2021-November/date.html#8895" target="_blank">[ fecha ]</a> <a href="https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/lacnog/2021-November/thread.html#8895" target="_blank">[ hilo ]</a> <a href="https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/lacnog/2021-November/subject.html#8895" target="_blank">[ asunto ]</a> <a href="https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/lacnog/2021-November/author.html#8895" target="_blank">[ autor ]</a> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt;text-align:center" align="center">
<hr width="100%" size="0" align="center"></div>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">Oi Fernando, <u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">O que eu quero dizer é que problema é independente de ser endereçamento global ou não. <u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">Esses blocos são simplesmente considerados violações de uso na maioria dos softwares, <u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">sistemas operacionais e implementações dos protocolos.<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">Ou seja, qualquer coisa no sentido de usa-los precisa de todo aquele trabalho. <u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">Eu simplesmente não consigo ver como chegar-se a qualquer meio termo nesse sentido - todo <u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">mundo que produz equipamentos de rede vai ter que revisar o código. <u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">Se considerarmos que, o uso como endereçamento global é o máximo ganho possível,<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">e ainda assim não vale o esforço, qualquer outro uso não fará sentido.<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">De 2007 a 2009 se conversou sobre o reuso. Note que a primeira proposta foi para uso <u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">privado, que depois evoluiu para simplesmente tornar esses endereços válidos:<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">* August 3, 2007 - Redesignation of 240/4 from "Future Use" to "Limited Use for Large Private Internets <u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><a href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-wilson-class-e-00" target="_blank">https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-wilson-class-e-00</a><u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">* March 2, 2008 - Reclassifying 240/4 as usable unicast address space <u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><a href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-fuller-240space-00" target="_blank">https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-fuller-240space-00</a><u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">* September 13, 2008 - Reclassifying 240/4 as usable unicast address space <u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><a href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-fuller-240space-01" target="_blank">https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-fuller-240space-01</a><u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"> <u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">Passaram-se mais de 10 anos e nem isso foi adiante. Esses IPs ainda sao considerados<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">invalidos pelas RFCs correntes.<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">Linux responde como argumento invalido<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">Routers também…<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">Apple também<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">Resumindo, os equipamentos atuais não tem suporte. Se os sistemas operacionais e routers fossem atualizados<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">os provedores de acesso deveriam realizar upgrade em *TODOS* os equipamentos, e eventualmente algum equipamento<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">legado teria que ser substituído, assim como foi para suportar IPv6.<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">O que eu quero dizer no final das contas é que estamos revisitando um problema que muita gente já estudou e avaliou.<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">Essa proposta não foi descartada de imediato. Muita gente já gastou muito tempo achar uma saída por esse caminho...<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">Acredito que será difícil você encontrar suporte para qualquer proposta nesse sentido 15 anos depois.<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">Outro ponto é a demanda (ou falta dela) que o Rubens citou. Até hoje não ouvi nenhuma operadora reclamando <u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">de falta de endereçamento privado que elas não achassem uma saída.<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">A solução que várias operadoras tem usado para liberar os IPs de backbone é por colocar toda a rede com <u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">endereçamento IPv6 e transportar IPv4 sobre IPv6 (normalmente MPLS). <u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">Ou seja, existem soluções viáveis que não dependem de nenhuma nova RFC.<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span style="color:red">A proposta do Chen, Adaptive IPv4 Address Space (draft-chen-ati-adaptive-ipv4-address-space-09.txt)</span> <span style="color:red">sugere usodo 240/4 para IoT.<u></u><u></u></span></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span style="color:red">Mas desenvolver um novo protocolo com foco em IoT e restrito a 256M devices</span> quando se fala em 5 Bilhoes de IoT <u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">previstos em 2022 nao parece que vai atrair a atenção de muita gente. A ultima atualizacao dessa draft foi em 2021.<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">Olhando pra esse histórico todo, acho que a proposta do Schoen (<a href="https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-schoen-intarea-unicast-127-00.html" target="_blank">https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-schoen-intarea-unicast-127-00.html</a>)<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">(assunto desse email) também não vá adiante. Propor alterar a máscara de interface de Loopback em todos<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">os equipamento que falam IP para resgatar menos de um /8. Não creio que será bem aceita!<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">Legal a discussão Fernando, me serviu pra dar uma atualizada em como anda esse assunto… ;-)<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">Abraço a todos.<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">Leandro Bertholdo<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">><i> On 29 Nov 2021, at 04:31, Fernando Frediani <<a href="https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog" target="_blank">fhfrediani en gmail.com</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></i></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">><i> <u></u><u></u></i></pre>
<pre style="margin-left:35.4pt">><i> Olá Leandro<u></u><u></u></i></pre>
<p style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span style="font-size:13.5pt">***************</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div id="gmail-m_2607744743506967037DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<table style="margin-left:35.4pt;border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt solid rgb(211,212,222)" cellpadding="0" border="1">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="width:41.25pt;border:none;padding:9.75pt 0.75pt 0.75pt" width="55">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=icon" target="_blank"><span style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none"><span style="color:blue"><img style="width: 0.4791in; height: 0.302in;" id="gmail-m_2607744743506967037_x0000_i1025" src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif" width="46" height="29" border="0"></span></span></a><u></u><u></u></p>
</td>
<td style="width:352.5pt;border:none;padding:9pt 0.75pt 0.75pt" width="470">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height:13.5pt"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(65,66,78)">Virus-free.
<a href="https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient&utm_term=link" target="_blank"><span style="color:rgb(68,83,234)">www.avast.com</span></a>
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:35.4pt"><span style="color:white">_______________________________________________
LACNOG mailing list <a href="mailto:LACNOG@lacnic.net" target="_blank">LACNOG@lacnic.net</a>
<a href="https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog" target="_blank">https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog</a> Cancelar
suscripcion: <a href="https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/options/lacnog" target="_blank">https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/options/lacnog</a>
</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<br>
**********************************************<br>
IPv4 is over<br>
Are you ready for the new Internet ?<br>
<a href="http://www.theipv6company.com" target="_blank">http://www.theipv6company.com</a><br>
The IPv6 Company<br>
<br>
This electronic message contains information which may be
privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for
the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further
non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use
of the contents of this information, even if partially, including
attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a
criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware
that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents
of this information, even if partially, including attached files,
is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so
you must reply to the original sender to inform about this
communication and delete it.<br>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<pre>_______________________________________________
LACNOG mailing list
<a href="mailto:LACNOG@lacnic.net" target="_blank">LACNOG@lacnic.net</a>
<a href="https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog" target="_blank">https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog</a>
Cancelar suscripcion: <a href="https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/options/lacnog" target="_blank">https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/options/lacnog</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
LACNOG mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:LACNOG@lacnic.net" target="_blank">LACNOG@lacnic.net</a><br>
<a href="https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/listinfo/lacnog</a><br>
Cancelar suscripcion: <a href="https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/options/lacnog" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mail.lacnic.net/mailman/options/lacnog</a><br>
</blockquote></div>