Re: 240/4 (Re: 44/8)

2019-07-26 Thread Greg Skinner via NANOG
> On Jul 22, 2019, at 9:15 PM, Ross Tajvar wrote: > >> Editor's note: This draft has not been submitted to any formal >> process. It may change significantly if it is ever submitted. >> You are reading it because we trust you and we value your >> opinions. *Please do not

Re: 240/4 (Re: 44/8)

2019-07-22 Thread Ross Tajvar
> Editor's note: This draft has not been submitted to any formal > process. It may change significantly if it is ever submitted. > You are reading it because we trust you and we value your > opinions. *Please do not recirculate it.* Please join us in > testing patches

Re: 240/4 (Re: 44/8)

2019-07-22 Thread George Herbert
Most importantly, if you're running out of 1918 space is a totally different problem than running out of global routable space. If you patch common OSes for 240/4 usability but a significant fraction of say unpatched OSes, IOT, consumer routers, old random net cruft necessary for infrastructure

Re: 240/4 (Re: 44/8)

2019-07-22 Thread Owen DeLong
> On Jul 22, 2019, at 20:14 , Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > > On Mon, 22 Jul 2019, Owen DeLong wrote: > >> 2. It was decided that the effort to modify each and every IP >> stack in order to facilitate use of this relatively small block (16 /8s >> being evaluated against a global >>

240/4 (Re: 44/8)

2019-07-22 Thread Mikael Abrahamsson
On Mon, 22 Jul 2019, Owen DeLong wrote: 2. It was decided that the effort to modify each and every IP stack in order to facilitate use of this relatively small block (16 /8s being evaluated against a global run rate at the time of roughly 2.5 /8s per month, mostly