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

Tue Nov 22 03:44:31 UTC 2022

On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 11:20 AM Joe Maimon <jmaimon at jmaimon.com> wrote:

> Indeed that is exactly what has been happening since the initial
> proposals regarding 240/4. To the extent that it is now largely
> supported or available across a wide variety of gear, much of it not
> even modern in any way.
>

As someone who has been involved in the deployment of network gear into
class E space (extensively, for our own internal reasons, which doesn't
preclude public use of class E), "largely supported" != "universally
supported".

There remains hardware devices that blackhole class E traffic, for which
there is no fix. https://seclists.org/nanog/2021/Nov/272 is where I list
one of them. There are many, many other devices where we have seen
interesting behavior, some of which has been fixed, some of which has not.

cheers,

lincoln.

>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20221122/53d37568/attachment.html>