In message <5F90644C-5457-460F-9BC3-70802B13A270@delong.com>, Owen DeLong write s:
Cisco is just one example. The fact is it will likely not work in cell phones, home gateways, windows PCs, Mac's, .... I understand some progress has been made... but choose your scope wisely and pick your battles and know that the weight of the world is against you (cisco and msft)
I don't think I had general usage in mind, more along the lines of the "middle 4" in NAT444 that will be rolled out in many networks to conserve IP space.
Infeasible. NAT444 is primarily needed to avoid doing a CPE forklift for nearly every subscriber. To deploy these addresses in that space would require a CPE forklift for nearly every subscriber.
Firstly it is entirely possible to do this incrementally. Secondly it doesn't require a fork lift upgrade. A minimal upgrade is all that is required. For modern Linux boxes just setting a DHCP option would be enough. A two line fix in a config file.
@George
Please don't speculating on when Cisco or Microsoft will support 240/4 on this list. Ask your account rep, then report back with facts. Arm-chair engineering accounts for too many emails on this list.
The usage I have in mind would be transparent to the end stations and, frankly, someone who produces provider gear and CPE that can take advantage of that space is going to have a great selling point. There is some gold under there for someone. 240/4 is a great big "dig here" sign if they want some of it.
Maybe, but, CPE is rarely a unified solution, even within the same carrier.
Owen -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org