On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 10:31 AM Seth Mattinen <[email protected]> wrote: > On 3/7/22 2:14 PM, Abraham Y. Chen wrote: > > The cost of this software engineering should be minimal. > > So basically no solution is offered to what is the showstopper for this > proposal, only a hand wave that it "should be" easy to fix (but that's > everyone else's problem). I mean, I believe this has been discussed to > death many times over in the past and yet here we still are.
Hi Seth, AFAICT, the core of Abraham's proposal is to deploy 240/4 as an addition to RFC1918 space, to be used as folks' equipment permits. Activity beyond that (associated with IoT) appears to have no inter-domain application that need fall within the standards development space at this time. Would you care to articulate the showstopper problem you see for the standards-relevant portion of the proposal? Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin [email protected] https://bill.herrin.us/
