> >> Cisco is just one example. The fact is it will likely not work in >> cell phones, home gateways, windows PCs, Mac's, .... I understand >> some progress has been made... but choose your scope wisely and pick >> your battles and know that the weight of the world is against you >> (cisco and msft) >> > > I don't think I had general usage in mind, more along the lines of the > "middle 4" in NAT444 that will be rolled out in many networks to > conserve IP space. > Infeasible. NAT444 is primarily needed to avoid doing a CPE forklift for nearly every subscriber. To deploy these addresses in that space would require a CPE forklift for nearly every subscriber.
>> @George >> >> Please don't speculating on when Cisco or Microsoft will support 240/4 >> on this list. Ask your account rep, then report back with facts. >> Arm-chair engineering accounts for too many emails on this list. > > The usage I have in mind would be transparent to the end stations and, > frankly, someone who produces provider gear and CPE that can take > advantage of that space is going to have a great selling point. There > is some gold under there for someone. 240/4 is a great big "dig here" > sign if they want some of it. > > Maybe, but, CPE is rarely a unified solution, even within the same carrier. Owen
