Alternative Re: ipv4/25s and above Re: 202211210951.AYC

Mon Nov 21 22:48:05 UTC 2022

Eric Kuhnke wrote:
> Quite simply, expecting the vast amount of legacy ipv4-only equipment 
> out there in the world that is 10, 15, 20 years old to magically 
> become compatible with the use of 240/4 in the global routing table is 
> a non viable solution. It is not a financial reality for many small to 
> medium sized ISPs in lower income countries.
>
> The amount of time and effort that would be required to implement your 
> proposal is much better spent on ipv6 implementation and various forms 
> of improved cgnat.

In specific focus on 240/4

Simultaneously claiming that enabling 240/4 as unicast involves 
difficulty that in comparison makes IPv6 (and then you add in CGNAT!) 
somehow more achievable is ridiculous.

Regardless of the exact scenario.

Joe