There is prior art here, and likely patents held by HP http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bound-dstm-exp-04
> -----Original Message----- > From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Baldur > Norddahl > Sent: Monday, July 13, 2015 10:10 AM > To: nanog@nanog.org > Subject: Fwd: Overlay broad patent on IPv6? > > Nah what you describe is a different invention. Someone probably already > has a patent on that. > > The browser will do a DNS lookup on slashdot.org and then cache that - > forever (or until you restart the browser). Yes it will ignore the TTL (apps > don't get the TTL at all, so apps don't know). Same happens if you ssh to > yourserver.someplace.com. One DNS lookup, the traffic sticks there forever > or until the session is terminated. DNS is horrible for this. > > If they had a IPv4 internal private network going you would not need to > hook unto the DNS at all. Just get IP address when something wants to be > routed out the WAN port. Also the NAT table is a good indicator of when > you can release the address again. > > On other words, that would work, but the system described in the patent > app wont. > > Of course both systems are useless. I can not imagine any end user that > wont have a ton of IPv4 going on for the next decade to come. And when > time comes, we are more likely to NAT64 than this. > > Regards, > > Baldur > > > > > > On 13 July 2015 at 18:04, Blake Dunlap <iki...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > The point is you'd already have a 192 address or something, and it > > would only grab the external address for a short duration for use as > > an external PAT address, thus oversubscribing the ip4 pool to users > > who need it (based on dns). Its still pretty broken, but less broken > > than you describe. > > > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 8:55 AM, <a.l.m.bu...@lboro.ac.uk> wrote: > > > Hi, > > >> This is actually a good idea. Roll out an IPV6 only network and > > >> only > > pass > > >> out an IPV4 address if it's needed based on actual traffic. > > > > > > yes...shame someones applied for a patent on that! ;-) > > > > > > alan > >
