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

bzs at theworld.com bzs at theworld.com
Tue Nov 22 07:30:04 UTC 2022


I'm not opposed to making 240/4 unicast but I'd agree it wouldn't
solve much globally.

Nonetheless it might help for example some new org which can't get an
IPv4 allocation (or not sufficient.) They may really need to do both
IPv4 and IPv6 for example.

(ok, here we go, point by point alternatives, we've heard them all ok,
imagine there exists ONE worthy applicant for whom the alternatives
won't work or put them at some unfair disadvantage.)

But why bother solving any of this when we have stats!

1. Those stats aren't really that compelling, we have a bifurcated
protocol space w/ maybe/arguably 40% at IPv6 after many years of
trying.

2. I'm too lazy to hunt it down but how much of that IPv6 penetration
are mobile phones and similar endpoints, captive devices with
zeroconfig? Ok who cares if they are, but...

3. Even if we agree for the sake of argument that the net is roughly
50/50 v4/v6 that still means we're dependent on things like CGNAT and
dual-stack and various other hacks which are needed to navigate this
dual protocol universe which one could argue is PRECISELY what we
didn't want back in the pre-IPv6 days.

For example we might have lived up to the original idea of an internet
and supported DECNET and CHAOSNET and SNA and XNS etc etc etc because
we're heterogeneous, we're an INTERnet!

But we didn't because in practice that stinks even if in theory it's
as simple as getting them to float their protocols on IP directly or
encapsulate them over IP or similar. Just set the IP protocol bits and
to quote Jackie Gleason "awayyyy we go!" Or similar (I think DECNET
went for DECNET over TCP but lo I wander.)

It works, many have done it, and it always stinks.

The devil was in the details like getting enough experts around to
debug problems in your TCP/IP net and your XNS/IP or whatever
nets. And the duplication and/or expansion of equipment etc.

But that's where we are w/ IPv4/IPv6 and we think it's ok because we
slowly backed up into this mess all the while saying just think about
the rabbits Lennie (i.e., one day this will all be IPv6.)

So mere penetration is more than a little deceptive.

Granted there may be no great solution tho some proposals in the area
of (perhaps dynamically) federating the address space are at least
interesting in concept.

But I guess my point is let's not discourage those who are trying, the
problem is real.

-- 
        -Barry Shein

Software Tool & Die    | bzs at TheWorld.com             | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD       | 800-THE-WRLD
The World: Since 1989  | A Public Information Utility | *oo*


More information about the NANOG mailing list