On Mar 26, 2022, at 09:37 , Tom Beecher <beecher@beecher.cc> wrote:

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

While Mr. Chen may have considered that, he has repeatedly hand waved that it's 'not that big a deal.', so I don't think he adequately grasps the scale of that challenge.

It’s certainly clear that he does not understand that in terms of cost-benefit ratio, the benefit of deploying his idea divided by the cost is a significantly lower number (in my estimation) than the much larger benefit of deploying IPv6 divided by the rather limited remaining costs involved in doing so.

Owen

 

On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 9:53 AM Paul Rolland <rol@witbe.net> wrote:
Hello,

On Sat, 26 Mar 2022 09:35:30 -0400
"Abraham Y. Chen" <aychen@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