[ppml] 240/4

[Tony Hain]

Leo Bicknell wrote:
> In a message written on Wed, May 02, 2007 at 01:43:16PM -0700, Tony
> Hain wrote:
> > The misguided notion that this is simply a routing problem will
> result
> > in a lot of burned resources with absolutely no gain.  Even if you
> > magically had the ability to route that space today, what customer
> end
> > systems would you be able to stick there?
> 
> There are multiple proposals on the table for the space.  One of the
> proposals was by several CableCo's as additional RFC 1918 space to use
> to control their set top boxes and cable modems.  For those
> deployments, having their vendors update software for the set top boxes
> and cable modems FULLY fixes the "problem" and makes the space usable.

I am aware of that, and was thinking along those lines when I suggested
Greenfield deployments, but even then it is not as clean as 'just fix the
set tops'. There is a pile of back-end support software that nobody knows
what it will do, and that software runs on general purpose OS systems. The
set top system is not completely closed, but there is at least a hope.

Tony 

> There are other fully homogenous environments that might be able to
> quickly use the space as well.
> 
> In a message written on Wed, May 02, 2007 at 01:45:23PM -0700, David
> Conrad wrote:
> > I'd be happy to write a draft redesignating the class E space if
> > somebody can tell me what the consensus is on what it should be
> > redesignated to, e.g., "normal" unicast?  RFC-1918 extension?  Half-
> > and-half?  Something else?
> 
> It's a two part problem:
> 
> #1 - Write an RFC that software should be updated to treat Class E
>      space as normal unicast.  After all, even 1918 space is just
>      normal unicast from the perspective of virtually every device
>      out there.
> 
> #2 - Have the community decide if we want to give this out as
>      additional 1918 space, full IP unicast space, or some "half
>      and half" arrangement.  We can use the time the vendors are
>      fixing their code to have that debate.
> 
> Since you volunteered, please write #1 ASAP. :)  It will spur people to
> have the conversation in #2 much quicker.
> 
> --
>        Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
>         PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/ Read TMBG List -
> tmbg-list-request at tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org