On 7/15/15 4:35 PM, Joe Maimon wrote: <snip>
At this point, you are running the risk of conflating your goals with your technical objections to the goals of others. And this has always been the real underlying issue.
My goal in an operational capacity is to continue to hold onto the quality and utility of IPv4 services until my customers don't need them anymore whether that comes 5 years from now, 10 or never. balkanzing them on the basis of what prefixes they can reach, and consigning new or growning entrants to address ranges that poorly serve the installed base doesn't serve that end. IPv4 as a mature deployed technology is quite successful at resisting innovation whether in the forwarding plane or at the transport. When I consider where I should be expending resources on IPv4 inovation or elsewhere, I look to minimize the NRE I have to expend sustaining IPv4.
Joe