|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: 240/4
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Stephen Wilcox wrote: You get a D on those facts because you did not review the "literature", did not attempt reasonable coverage of the problem space, and did not investigate whether or not there were other versions of the software that have been patched to support 240/4. I almost wrote a message similar to Joe's (actually did, and then canceled it). I think (realy hope) that there's a misunderstanding here about exactly what 240/4 space would be used for. I think Michael's point is that it can be allocated as "unique space for internal use". i.e. kind of like 1918 space, but you know your slice of 240/4 is only used on your network[1]. For that purpose, it's fine, as long as you determine that all your gear allows it. If anyone really thinks it can be announced into the global routing table and expected to function, I'm afraid they've swallowed the crack pipe so far down that this thread is pointless for them. Too many devices will never (can never[2]) be upgraded and are unlikely to go away in the forseeable future. You just can't expect 240/4 (regardless of how trivial the code change would be) to ever work as globally & reliably as people expect the internet to work. I could see bits of 240/4 perhaps being of use to large cable companies for whom there just isn't enough 1918 space to address all their CPE gear...and/or they really want unique addressing so that if/when networks merge IP conflicts are avoided. 1) As much as this can ever be known...you can't stop random IP squatters from picking random IP space out of their hats for use as "private" networks behind NAT. Eventually, they realize some bit of the internet is unreachable...because it's their LAN. The various squatters using 1/8 and the other "not-yet-allocated" /8s will all get the rude awakenings they deserve in time. 2) Anyone care to guess how much network gear is deployed that either won't or can't be upgraded? i.e. Old cisco gear without the RAM and/or flash to handle a newer code train...the old one in use long since unsupported, or gear from vendors that no longer exist? As long as this stuff generally works, nobody's likely to replace it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Lewis | I route Senior Network Engineer | therefore you are Atlantic Net | _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
|