On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 8:26 PM Abraham Y. Chen wrote:
> Dear Tom: *
>
[...]
>
> 2) "...Your proposal appears to rely on a specific value in the IP
> option header to create your overlay": Not really, as soon as the
> 100.64/10 netblock is replaced by the 240/4, each CG-NAT module can
>
*Happy Thanksgiving *
*We are Grateful for Community Members Like You! *
*NANOG truly takes a village, and we wouldn't be here without members like
you. *
Thank you for your support in building the Internet of Tomorrow. We wish
you and yours a very Happy Thanksgiving.
*VIDEO - In Memory of
*Happy Thanksgiving *
*We are Grateful for Community Members Like You! *
*NANOG truly takes a village, and we wouldn't be here without members like
you. *
Thank you for your support in building the Internet of Tomorrow. We wish
you and yours a very Happy Thanksgiving.
*VIDEO - In Memory of
Dear Eric:
0) Your analysis may have started from an assumption that is different
from that of the EzIP. That is,
1) The EzIP proposes to use the 240/4 as a replacement of the 100.64/10
of RFC6598 for enhancing the CG-NAT. Thus, 240/4 will be used as
reusable netblocks like those in
4 matches
Mail list logo
