Professional ? with Coconut Guilmette ? ________________________________ From: Phil Smith <phillip.smith.adhami@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2020 1:14 AM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io> Cc: Brielle <bruns@2mbit.com>; NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Re: RIPE NCC Executive Board election Gentleman, please this is a professional environment, lets keep it that way. On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 12:13 PM Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>> wrote: LOL funny seeing you changing your mind by 180 degrees when someone you know in the community writing to you the exact same thing. Grow a backbone please. ________________________________ From: NANOG <nanog-bounces@nanog.org<mailto:nanog-bounces@nanog.org>> on behalf of Brielle <bruns@2mbit.com<mailto:bruns@2mbit.com>> Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2020 9:57 PM To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org<mailto:nanog@nanog.org>> Subject: Re: RIPE NCC Executive Board election On 5/13/2020 12:42 PM, William Herrin wrote:
Hi Brielle,
http://bill.herrin.us/network/ipxl.html
Someone said much as you did way back in 2007. It bugged me, this defeatism that said there was no way IPv4 could have been incrementally updated to support more addresses, that a greenfield protocol was the only path forward. So I designed an upgrade factoring in the need for pre- and post-upgrade stacks and networks to interoperate over a period of years. It took all of 4 printed pages.
It's clear IPv6 is the path forward. It was clear in 2007. But don't for a second believe that's because IPv4 could not have been upgraded in place. That's a failure of imagination.
Interesting, thank you for the insight and some detailed breakdown. I'm actually really glad someone with some more experience jumped in with some actual background in this effort. One thing that cropped up in my mind from the late 90s and AFAIK still goes on today - isn't it pretty well documented that more then a small number of 'professional' firewalls have a habit of just outright discarding/rejecting/barfing on packets with options in them that they don't recognize? IE: PMTU/ECN blackhole redux. Of course since IPx1 requires some stack upgrades, so that point is moot really. Sigh. Back to the original thought that its just easier to go IPv6 then try to 'fix' whats already out there. -- Brielle Bruns The Summit Open Source Development Group http://www.sosdg.org / http://www.ahbl.org