202203071610.AYC Re: Making Use of 240/4 NetBlock

William Herrin bill at herrin.us
Wed Mar 9 18:54:17 UTC 2022

On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 10:31 AM Seth Mattinen <sethm at rollernet.us> wrote:
> On 3/7/22 2:14 PM, Abraham Y. Chen wrote:
> > The cost of this software engineering should be minimal.
> So basically no solution is offered to what is the showstopper for this
> proposal, only a hand wave that it "should be" easy to fix (but that's
> everyone else's problem). I mean, I believe this has been discussed to
> death many times over in the past and yet here we still are.

Hi Seth,

AFAICT, the core of Abraham's proposal is to deploy 240/4 as an
addition to RFC1918 space, to be used as folks' equipment permits.
Activity beyond that (associated with IoT) appears to have no
inter-domain application that need fall within the standards
development space at this time.

Would you care to articulate the showstopper problem you see for the
standards-relevant portion of the proposal?

Bill Herrin

William Herrin
bill at herrin.us

More information about the NANOG mailing list