[ppml] 240/4
bmanning at karoshi.com
bmanning at karoshi.com
Wed May 2 18:12:18 EDT 2007
- Previous message: [ppml] 240/4
- Next message: [ppml] 240/4
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 01:58:32PM -0700, David Conrad wrote: > On May 2, 2007, at 1:43 PM, Tony Hain wrote: > > If you write the draft now and ram it through as an RFC in less > > than a year, > > you would be extremely lucky to find 1% of the globally deployed > > end systems > > actually able to exist in a network that has been assigned part of > > that > > block before 2012. > > > > It is worth writing it up for Greenfield deployments of closed > > systems that > > will not need to include any of the Win9x systems that will > > continue to be > > in use. > > This would appear to argue for RFC 1918 extension. > > Rgds, > -drc on the presumption that we (the IP using community) really have no intention of abandoning IPv4 anytime real soon, I think a method to place previously unusable space into the useable pool is a good thing, even it if takes years for some folks to recast their ASICs. its unrealistic to expect retrofit of all existant systems to support such a change... the cost/benefit is not there. but for new systems, sure. --bill
- Previous message: [ppml] 240/4
- Next message: [ppml] 240/4
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the PPML mailing list