Re: 202203071610.AYC Re: Making Use of 240/4 NetBlock

On Mar 12, 2022, at 8:15 AM, Abraham Y. Chen wrote: > > 2)On the other hand, there was a recent APNIC blog that specifically > reminded us of a fairly formal request for re-designating the 240/4 netblock > back in 2008 (second grey background box). To me, this means whether to > change the

Re: Making Use of 240/4 NetBlock Re: 202203140004.AYC

Hi, John: 0)    Thanks for your comments. 1)    Re: Ur. Pt. 1): I have recently been informed of such activities. So far, my attempt to submit a draft and to reach the group chairs have not been successful. 2)    Re: Ur. Pt. 2): Our work looks very much inline with your Unicast project. My

Re: V6 still not supported (was Re: CC: s to Non List Members, (was Re: 202203080924.AYC Re: 202203071610.AYC Re: Making Use of 240/4, NetBlock))

> On Mar 11, 2022, at 8:39 AM, Joe Maimon wrote: > > Google's statistics... I'm not sure which of you I'm replying to. The comment was made on NANOG the other day that we should discount Google statistics because they have been promoting IPv6 for a decade. It's true that they have been doing s

Re: Making Use of 240/4 NetBlock

On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 7:55 PM William Herrin wrote: > On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 12:29 PM Christopher Morrow > wrote: > > What's the actual proposal for 240/4? > > Is it: "Make this usable by me on my /intranet/?" > > Is it: "Make this usable across the internet between bespoke endpoints?" > > Is

Making Use of 240/4 NetBlock

Hi, Jordi: 1)    " ... Because it is a single Internet, and what we do in some parts of Internet will affect others? ... ":    The nice thing about the EzIP scheme is that it proposes a collection of overlay network modules (the RAN - Regional Area Network), each is tethered from the existing

Re: Making Use of 240/4 NetBlock

On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 12:29 PM Christopher Morrow wrote: > What's the actual proposal for 240/4? > Is it: "Make this usable by me on my /intranet/?" > Is it: "Make this usable across the internet between bespoke endpoints?" > Is it: "Make this usable for any services/users on the wider internet,

Re: Not Making Use of 240/4 NetBlock

* b...@theworld.com (b...@theworld.com) [Mon 14 Mar 2022, 00:31 CET]: Personally I'd rather hear from the RIRs regarding the value or not of making more IPv4 space such as 240/4 available. They're on the front lines of this. You've got your policy development process diagram upside down. The

Re: Not Making Use of 240/4 NetBlock

Personally I'd rather hear from the RIRs regarding the value or not of making more IPv4 space such as 240/4 available. They're on the front lines of this. I think sometimes what we're manipulating in these debates is the time factor: Someone with a worthy, immediate, urgent need versus some dist

Re: Making Use of 240/4 NetBlock

Christopher Morrow wrote: On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 10:39 AM William Herrin > wrote: On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 1:22 AM Joe Maimon mailto:jmai...@jmaimon.com>> wrote: > The true dilemma is that any amelioration of IPv4 scarcity may indeed > contribute to f

Re: Making Use of 240/4 NetBlock

On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 10:39 AM William Herrin wrote: > On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 1:22 AM Joe Maimon wrote: > > The true dilemma is that any amelioration of IPv4 scarcity may indeed > > contribute to further delaying mass global IPv6 adoption, regardless of > > whose effort and time is involved.

Re: V6 still widely supported (was Re: CC: s to Non List Members,

On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 4:16 PM Josh Luthman wrote: > Verizon Wireless does have v6. I see a 100.64/24 on my phone all the time. > > wireless != wired/internet/fios/dsl Verizon, as I noted elsewhere, in the wired network (as701 / 702 / 703, mostly these days) supported v6 in ~2005 across the en

Re: Not Making Use of 240/4 NetBlock

> Yet the four largest cable networks and all of the mobile networks in the > US have had full IPv6 support for years as do AWS, Google, Azure, Digital > Ocean, Linode, and many other hosting providers. > > Could you explain what "most" means where you are? a vast number of large non-us mobile ne

Re: Russia attempts mandating installation of root CA on clients for TLS MITM

Masataka Ohta wrote: Sean Donelan wrote: You'll notice there still isn't a CA trust list for use in the USG :-) Wait one... so who issues all the certificates for DoD CAC cards? Miles Fidelman -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. Yog

Re: Not Making Use of 240/4 NetBlock

It appears that Joe Maimon said: >Saku Ytti wrote: >> What if many/most large CDN, cloud, tier1 would commonly announce a >> plan to drop all IPv4 at their edge 20 years from now? How would that >> change our work? What would we stop doing and what would we start doing? > >I cant see how it wou

Re: Russia attempts mandating installation of root CA on clients for TLS MITM

Sean Donelan wrote: You'll notice there still isn't a CA trust list for use in the USG :-) It merely means that PKI does not have its own security and relies on trust for all the CAs (not only the root ones), which means PKI is as secure as the plain Internet, which is secure if all the ISPs a

Re: Making Use of 240/4 NetBlock

On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 1:22 AM Joe Maimon wrote: > The true dilemma is that any amelioration of IPv4 scarcity may indeed > contribute to further delaying mass global IPv6 adoption, regardless of > whose effort and time is involved. > > And I find advocating for that to be wrong and perhaps to som

Re: Russia attempts mandating installation of root CA on clients for TLS MITM

On 2022-03-13, at 01:33, Sean Donelan wrote: > > Its not a question of whether you trust one CA (e.g. the Russian Ministry of > Digital Development CA), but whether everyone trusts all 100+ CA's in > universal trust stores to sign everything/anything. Right. Authorization is not a binary thin

Re: Making Use of 240/4 NetBlock

JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG wrote: Because it is a single Internet, and what we do in some parts of Internet will affect others? Because, at least in my case, I'm investing my efforts in what it seems to be the best in the long-term for the global community, not my personal preferences?

Re: 202203071610.AYC Re: Making Use of 240/4 NetBlock

Saku Ytti wrote: What if many/most large CDN, cloud, tier1 would commonly announce a plan to drop all IPv4 at their edge 20 years from now? How would that change our work? What would we stop doing and what would we start doing? I cant see how it would change or do anything IPv6-related for

Re: 202203071610.AYC Re: Making Use of 240/4 NetBlock

On Sat, 12 Mar 2022 at 18:19, Abraham Y. Chen wrote: > 3)" ... Changes to hardware and software to make use of 240/4 as ordinary > unicast IP addresses can and should proceed in parallel to such debate. ": > Agreed. Since through the EzIP Project, we have identified that the > hardwar