Let's Focus on Moving Forward Re: V6 still not supported

Tue Mar 29 19:25:57 UTC 2022

> On Mar 26, 2022, at 09:37 , Tom Beecher <beecher at beecher.cc> wrote:
> 
> Have you ever considered that this may be in fact:
> 
> */writing/* and */deploying/* the code that will allow the use of 240/4 the
> way you expect
> 
> While Mr. Chen may have considered that, he has repeatedly hand waved that it's 'not that big a deal.', so I don't think he adequately grasps the scale of that challenge.

It’s certainly clear that he does not understand that in terms of cost-benefit ratio, the benefit of deploying his idea divided by the cost is a significantly lower number (in my estimation) than the much larger benefit of deploying IPv6 divided by the rather limited remaining costs involved in doing so.

Owen

>  
> 
> On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 9:53 AM Paul Rolland <rol at witbe.net <mailto:rol at witbe.net>> wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Sat, 26 Mar 2022 09:35:30 -0400
> "Abraham Y. Chen" <aychen at avinta.com <mailto:aychen at avinta.com>> wrote:
> 
> > touching the hardware, by implementing the EzIP technique (*/disabling/* 
> > the program code that has been */disabling/* the use of the 240/4 
> > netblock), an existing CG-NAT module becomes a RAN! As to universal 
> 
> Have you ever considered that this may be in fact:
> 
> */writing/* and */deploying/* the code that will allow the use of 240/4 the
> way you expect 
> 
> 
> Paul

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20220329/42fd6290/attachment.html>