Hi, On Sun, Oct 06, 2019 at 12:38:14AM +0200, Kai 'wusel' Siering wrote: > Am 05.10.19 um 22:30 schrieb Michel Py: > > This 240/4 as an extension of RFC1918 thing is the perfect example of it. > > If 240/4 is to be given a different status than "reserved", the > only valid option is "public unicast", spread across the RIRs as > recovered space. As has been stated here may times, IPv4 is here > to stay, so it's vital that relevant amounts of "new" space are put > into the public pool.
I'd actually say "private" is a better denomination.
To make this useful as "public unicast", you need to upgrade *everything*
in the path between a device using 240/4 and "whatever it wants to talk to",
because un-upgraded routers or firewalls will just drop your packets
otherwise - so, if RIPE were to give out a subnet of 240/4, it would not
be very useful for "Internet" usage.
OTOH, if you're willing to upgrade your multi-million enterprise network
to make sure all devices support 240/4, it's all under your own control
and can be done.
(Would I do it? No... anything old won't grow support for it, and anything
*new* can do IPv6 for new deployments - on islands, with gateways in
between, but incidentially that's the only way a 240/4 deployment could
succeeed as well. But hey, not my career to bet on 240/4 being useful :-) )
Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
--
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
