[ppml] Arguments against Policy Proposal: IPv4 Soft Landing

[Durand, Alain]

David,

I will address the larger issue of IPv4 exhaustion 
in a later email, just responding to one specific point:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Conrad [mailto:drc at virtualized.org] 
> > 5) "Recycling of x% of IPv4 address space formerly used for internal
> >    infrastructure"
> >
> >    This may simply not be feasable. A large number of infrastructure
> >    devices are not upgradable to IPv6 due to physical constraints
> >    (eg: not enough memory). In environments like the one I'm working
> >    on, even with the most aggressive IPv6 plans, a very large number
> >    of legacy infrastructure devices will never be upgraded to IPv6.
> >    The new ones will, not the legacy ones.
> 
> In such cases, is there a reason you cannot use RFC 1918 for 
> the legacy devices?

We are using it, but RFC1918 space is too small for our needs.

   - Alain.