quietly....

Carlos M. Martinez carlosm3011 at gmail.com
Tue Feb 1 06:01:21 CST 2011


I think the ship has sailed for the class E /8s. Using them will require
significant effort and that effort, both time and money, is better spent
on deploying IPv6.

regards

Carlos

On 2/1/11 9:45 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> On Jan 31, 2011, at 10:43 PM, George Bonser wrote:
>
>>> 3. Busting out 16 more /8s only delays the IPv4 endgame by about a
>>> year.
>>>
>>> jms
>> If used for general assignment, sure.  But if used for what people have
>> been begging for NAT444 middle-4 space.  Well, that might work.  Code
>> update on the CPE is all it would take.  The systems involved would
>> never see it.
>>
>>
> If they could do code updates on the CPE, then, they could use RFC-1918.
>
> The problem is that code-updating that much CPE is, well, impractical to
> say the least.
>
> Owen




More information about the NANOG mailing list