RE: IPv8 / BGP8 / CF

“I assume you run a pretty big network. And likely on 10.x.x.x as thats what everyone does. How much more convenient would it be to segment networks by internal ASN number I chose 127.x.x.x as local network. “

No more or less convenient than it is currently.

How is “127.x.x.x” any different than “10.X.0.0 or 172.16.X.0”?
How is this any better than just using IPv6 which has more than enough addresses?

“Everything would be secured, isolated, managed, auditable. “

It is all of these things currently. I am not seeing how anything would be different.

I fail to see the problem you are wanting to solve that hasn’t already been solved more or less.

Regards,


----
Larry Brower
Network Specialist
Texas Department of Insurance

From: Jamie Thain <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2026 3:06 PM
To: Larry Brower <[email protected]>
Cc: North American Network Operators Group <[email protected]>; Joe Klein <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: IPv8 / BGP8 / CF


ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown or unexpected emails.
Larry,

Maybe, I am not sure the Nanog group has the same people, but some university students are working on it.

I have one thing I am trying to finish. But let me ask you,

I assume you run a pretty big network. And likely on 10.x.x.x as thats what everyone does. How much more convenient would it be to segment networks by internal ASN number I chose 127.x.x.x as local network.

127.<department>.<region>.floor. == 10 Billion IP addresses.

Everything would be secured, isolated, managed, auditable.

Jamie





On Thu, Apr 30, 2026 at 4:32 PM Larry Brower <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
" People are planning to build ipv8 right now."

Are these people in the room with us?


----
Larry Brower
Network Specialist
Texas Department of Insurance

-----Original Message-----
From: Jamie Thain via NANOG <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2026 2:29 PM
To: Joe Klein <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: North American Network Operators Group <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Jamie Thain <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: IPv8 / BGP8 / CF

ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown or unexpected emails.

Joe,

No patent apps it's all free. Corp isn't moving off ipv4 to ipv6. So ipv8 is an upgrade to ipv4.

So still need to fix the issues in ipv4/ipv6.

Like merging to companies both using 10.x

Unless a move is made ipv4 will still be running the warp drive.

People are planning to build ipv8 right now.

Jamie

On Thu., Apr. 30, 2026, 12:51 p.m. Joe Klein, <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

> This is very funny!
>
> - In 2004, very talented Chinese developers worked to implement IPv9.
> At present there are exclusive patents, but have yet to seen any code.
>
> - Over 20 cumulative years, there are about 0.5–2 trillion IPv6
> address instances, with the high side is driven by mobile devices,
> Wi-Fi roaming, privacy-address rotation, VMs, containers, VPNs, and
> tunnels. In short, this covers the ocean floor, caves, areas near
> Earth, and deep space. Will you and your team pay for the IPv4/IPv6
> change? When will you submit the patent applications (Similary to Microsoft patent for SEND/CGA)?
>
> Have fun.
>
> OO.
>
> Joe Klein
>
> "inveniet viam, aut faciet" --- Seneca's Hercules Furens (Act II,
> Scene 1) "*I skate to where the puck is going to be, not to where it has been."
> -- *Wayne Gretzky
> "I never lose. I either win or learn" - Nelson Mandela
>
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2026, 10:51 AM Tom Beecher via NANOG <
> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>> >
>> > Tough love is needed here, and the list is not providing it. You're
>> > not being polite, you're enabling.
>>
>>
>> Only works when the recipient is actually open to receiving feedback
>> and collaborating.
>>
>> Reading Mr. Thain's replies here and on int-area answers that
>> question quite rapidly.
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2026 at 2:35 AM Saku Ytti via NANOG <
>> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Tough love is needed here, and the list is not providing it. You're
>> > not being polite, you're enabling.
>> >
>> > Stop supporting this LLM psychosis.
>> >
>> > --
>> >   ++ytti
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > NANOG mailing list
>> >
>> >
>> https://lis/
>> ts.nanog.org<http://ts.nanog.org/>%2Farchives%2Flist%2Fnanog%40lists.nanog.org<http://40lists.nanog.org/>%2Fmessage%2F
>> QAQPQMJT3AEGHZERA2XJW3WIWBAMHBAI%2F&data=05%7C02%7Clarry.brower%40tdi
>> .texas.gov<http://texas.gov/>%7Cc3453c4609a743c6edf508dea6eee8e4%7C6c600c887a50421a9817a
>> 970a01aed2a%7C0%7C0%7C639131742220406986%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJF
>> bXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpb
>> CIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=z68PupwkZzOUUeCDnys6LqnLWd%2BF
>> Qk%2BbKmyR7hWOvqk%3D&reserved=0
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> NANOG mailing list
>>
>> https://lis/
>> ts.nanog.org<http://ts.nanog.org/>%2Farchives%2Flist%2Fnanog%40lists.nanog.org<http://40lists.nanog.org/>%2Fmessage%2F
>> YAH63OJ4IJ3GKNROAILZHO6YXQQ5NQ2S%2F&data=05%7C02%7Clarry.brower%40tdi
>> .texas.gov<http://texas.gov/>%7Cc3453c4609a743c6edf508dea6eee8e4%7C6c600c887a50421a9817a
>> 970a01aed2a%7C0%7C0%7C639131742220433138%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJF
>> bXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpb
>> CIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=S8FDk5iZSahEvFlR2%2FTPr9d%2Fr5
>> tqYX%2FGJRcg2GFPfb4%3D&reserved=0
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/KMODQSXZM35D3SHAER4UGOBOTWP22BD3/

_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list 
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/DDBEFGCLWZG7HMKAGNT6IBM4B735BRHD/