Michael, On Dec 7, 2011, at 10:39 AM, Michael Richardson wrote: > The CGN space seems like a very good place to use 240.0/10.
I believe the main driver behind this discussion is the need to deal with deployed non-field-upgradable CPE that has issues with having RFC 1918 space being assigned on the WAN interface. I'd guess said hardware would also likely have issues with 240/4 space being instead. > A single organization often controls and specifies all equipment which > will use the address space, and even in the cases where customers have > their own equipment, a lot of it will have no problem with 240. I long ago gave up being surprised at the problems (particularly low end) devices connected to the Internet had anytime you did _anything_ out of the ordinary. I am skeptical executive management of the ISPs interested in the draft-weil space would take your assurance that there would be no problems without data to back it up. More likely, they'll simply say "get another free block while we can" or "use 44.x.0.0/10" or something similar. Regards, -drc _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
