Re: [OPSAWG] Heads up - Plea for allocating a /8 to ISPs
james woodyatt <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.v6ops,gmane.ietf.ops |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Nov 11, 2010, at 19:10, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Do we have any idea how many bits of software and firmware contain logic something like
>
> if prefix in {10/8, 172.16/12, 192.168/16} then ... ?
Lots. Too many to enumerate before it won't matter. I can think of a half-dozen in my own codebase just off the top of my head.
> I presume all those components would have to be touched.
Except the proponents of this draft are motivated entirely by operational requirements for continuing to use legacy equipment. They are explicitly not interested in upgrading anything deployed today. They're expecting that future equipment and upgrades to existing equipment will make them IPv6-ready.
They're planning to deploy NAT444 knowing that it will break a bunch of stuff. (I'm not sure they understand just exactly what they'll be breaking, but I doubt they care. They have a hammer, and they're going to enjoy hammer things with it until everything is good and broken.)
--
james woodyatt <[email protected]>
member of technical staff, communications engineering
_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops