On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 12:37:59PM -0400, Tom Beecher 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 seems like it should only require changes on a few billion nodes, given the size of the IPv4 address space, right? Oh, wait, NAT... So I guess the question here is how do you plan to incentivize the patching of all these devices, many of which are legacy devices with no maintainer for the firmware/software, in roles where they may not be accessible, and protected by firewalls that understand Class E to be unusable space. I am unclear on the desirability of "fixing" the IPv4 network by touching lots of nodes, in a manner which will never be comprehensive, in order to free up a relatively small block of space. It's going to be crippled, less-valuable space. It seems to me like it'd be much more productive, if you're going to be touching gear, to move towards IPv6. ... JG -- Joe Greco - sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee, WI - http://www.sol.net "The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'"-Asimov