[ppml] 240/4

On May 2, 2007, at 2:08 PM, Durand, Alain wrote:
> I disagree... Any system today is expected to be able to use  
> RFC1918. This is not the case for 240/4.

True.  I meant RFC1918 in the sense that it would never be globally  
routed. As Tony points out, this would be private addressing for a  
limited set of devices (those that didn't treat class E specially).

Rgds,
-drc