Re: 240/4

2007-10-16 Thread Alain Durand
240/4 is tainted. The fact that some code exist somewhere to make it work is good, but the reality is that there are tons of equipment that do not support it. Deploying a large network with 240/4 is a problem of the same scale as migrating to IPv6, you need to upgrade code, certify equipment, etc.

Re: 240/4

2007-10-16 Thread Alain Durand
On 10/16/07 11:56 AM, "Randy Bush" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Classifying it as private use should come with the health warning "use this >> at your own risk, this stuff can blow up your network". In other words, this >> is for experimental use only. > > disagree. as you point out, this i

Re: 240/4

2007-10-17 Thread Alain Durand
On 10/17/07 3:38 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> 240/4 is tainted. The fact that some code exist somewhere to >> make it work is good, but the reality is that there are tons >> of equipment that do not support it. > > If you believe that, then don't use it. > > B

Re: 240/4

2007-10-18 Thread Alain Durand
On 10/18/07 12:53 PM, "Jon Lewis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I could see bits of 240/4 perhaps being of use to large cable companies > for whom there just isn't enough 1918 space to address all their CPE > gear...and/or they really want unique addressing so that if/when networks > merge IP c

Re: 240/4

2007-10-18 Thread Alain Durand
On 10/18/07 2:17 PM, "Brandon Galbraith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alain, > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but Comcast started moving to IPv6 addressing > *because* they ran out of 10. space. Absolutely. I made the point earlier, making 240/4 work is about the same order of magnitude as movi

Re: 240/4

2007-10-18 Thread Alain Durand
On 10/18/07 2:24 PM, "Joe Greco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Actually, though, I have a better solution. Let's ask the IETF to revise > an RFC, and define the first octet of an IPv4 address as being from 0- > 65535. That's asking the IETF to revise an RFC, too, such request being > just as

Re: European ISP enables IPv6 for all?

2007-12-17 Thread Alain Durand
Apparently, from what I have gathered from other french people, Free has rolled out a variation of 6to4 using their own prefix instead of the well known 2002::/16. As they control their home gateway, this was fairly easy for them to do and did not require much core infrastructure change. The appar