Let's Focus on Moving Forward Re: V6 still not supported Re: 20220326125.AYC

Sat Mar 26 16:38:07 UTC 2022

Hi, Paul:

1)    " ...  may be in fact: /writing/* and */deploying/* the code  ... 
":    Having no idea why and how the 240/4 netblock became so 
mysteriously kept away from being used while the IPv4 was officially 
already on its way to "Sun Set", we started the conventional approach as 
you stated. It was quite frustrating since we did not have the 
background in networking software. One day, we came across a short 
program code fragment that did the function of /*disabling*/ 240/4 
addressed IP packets. It is the "there exists an example" moment for us, 
like proofing a mathematics theorem. After all, there was no magic 
separating 240/4 from the rest of the IPv4 address pool to start with. 
It cleared our mind about this particular task. Now, we only cite this 
reference to challenge those software engineers who may state that using 
the 240/4 in their code is a lot more involved.   .... Q.E.D.  😉

Regards,

Abe (2022-03-26 12:37 EDT)

On 2022-03-26 09:52, Paul Rolland wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Sat, 26 Mar 2022 09:35:30 -0400
> "Abraham Y. Chen"<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

-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20220326/463bb65f/attachment.html>