Waste will kill ipv6 too

George Metz george.metz at gmail.com
Thu Dec 21 00:54:25 CST 2017


I think he's referring to all the Unicast IPv6 outside of 2000::/3 getting
designated as "reserved", and therefore no gear will ever successfully
route it... just like happened with the Class E space.

You'd think we would know better than to let that happen, but there's a lot
of things you'd think we would know better than to let happen, and yet it
still happens, with dreary regularity.

On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 7:14 PM, <valdis.kletnieks at vt.edu> wrote:

> On Wed, 20 Dec 2017 18:15:44 -0500, Joe Maimon said:
>
> > There is plenty more to wonder about, for example, will the rest of the
> > unicast space get Class E'd?
>
> That's a non-starter, as pretty much all the gear out there has code that
> says
> 'Class E is reserved" (including gear that's *already* doing production
> IPv6).  If
> you're going to upgrade everything *anyhow*, deploying IPv6 has better
> bang for
> the buck than Class E support.
>


More information about the NANOG mailing list