Re: "class E" (was: Consensus Call: draft-weil-shared-transition-space-request)
Cameron Byrne <cb.list6@gmail.com> Mon, 05 December 2011 18:19 UTC
Return-Path: <cb.list6@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E54021F8C26 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 10:19:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.711
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.711 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.112, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xO3DTACmZS+p for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 10:19:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pz0-f44.google.com (mail-pz0-f44.google.com [209.85.210.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD3F021F85B9 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 10:19:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: by dadv40 with SMTP id v40so6025955dad.31 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 05 Dec 2011 10:19:05 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=iyP3X9LAJpfopLCcRgz/cioiNeuQuwFiQUm0l1ePHZE=; b=B7IEVnf8eDGwCUwRezLL5NI7BLqGFfpteqtnqUtatrKwGFvHx/bc4LGBn+nEcrz6HL ru1MOFM4c7lwA08HFMR8vJv8s244ogqXflOUrHu7xYt/ci3MsCwaw820ta+Yp1dwb72U xek94W8fo0lXk2cAEcvjo0Sxr8w0zTCdodC+g=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.68.30.68 with SMTP id q4mr25018157pbh.75.1323109145333; Mon, 05 Dec 2011 10:19:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.142.43.11 with HTTP; Mon, 5 Dec 2011 10:19:05 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAHhFybri7XnxeH8tK8g3Tyu34m8U8dnaZQ8pHhmVDGRfXfttYg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAHhFybri7XnxeH8tK8g3Tyu34m8U8dnaZQ8pHhmVDGRfXfttYg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 10:19:05 -0800
Message-ID: <CAD6AjGSV22tt+5kEhLZtKSoqVjMV6=SBRezB3e0Mgfrr36E1zg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: "class E" (was: Consensus Call: draft-weil-shared-transition-space-request)
From: Cameron Byrne <cb.list6@gmail.com>
To: Frank Ellermann <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 18:19:06 -0000
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Frank Ellermann <hmdmhdfmhdjmzdtjmzdtzktdkztdjz@gmail.com> wrote: > On 5 December 2011 04:27, Cameron Byrne wrote: > > [they = the IETF] >>> they underscored that point by not rejecting various past attempts at >>> expanding private ipv4 space like 240/4. > >> Sorry. S/not rejecting/rejecting/ > > ACK. The last state I'm aware of is that the 240/4 addresses minus one > were and still are (RFC 5735) reserved for IETF experiments, did I miss > some newer IETF consensus about this? > > -Frank > > <http://omniplex.blogspot.com/2008/06/lost-found-268435455-free-ips.html> Hi, The addresses, AFAIK, are still in a "no mans" land. I went on a short-lived quest to make these addresses usable in 2008, because in 2008, they were not usable and i needed addresses. Meaning, Linux, FreeBSD, Windows would not accept these addresses in configuration and Juniper and Cisco router would not only not accept these addresses as part of their configuration, they would not route the addresses in transit. Some of this may have changed, but not enough to make this a clear win. I was told, by a large vendor of network gear, an IETF direction must be made to define a purpose for these addresses, like: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wilson-class-e-02 http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fuller-240space-02 Both failed to gain support (i assume), and thus nothing happened. My assumption is these drafts were killed as "IPv4 life support" RFC 5735 leaves the use of 240/4 undefined ... it could be used for public, private, multicast, some future use we never thought of, carrier pigeons ... Thus, my feeling is that the IETF implicitly said "no ipv4 life support by expanding private addresses, the cost of ipv4 will go higher and higher, we can all see it like a slow moving train wreck, make your strategies wisely". Making this allocation for draft-weil is changing the rules, slowing the train wreck, going backwards of previous guidance(IPv6 is the answer to IPv4 exhaust), while at the same time increasing the amount of of damage. cb
- "class E" (was: Consensus Call: draft-weil-shared… Frank Ellermann
- Re: "class E" (was: Consensus Call: draft-weil-sh… David Conrad
- Re: "class E" (was: Consensus Call: draft-weil-sh… Cameron Byrne
- Re: "class E" (was: Consensus Call: draft-weil-sh… Marshall Eubanks
- Re: "class E" (was: Consensus Call: draft-weil-sh… Bob Hinden
- Re: "class E" (was: Consensus Call: draft-weil-sh… Noel Chiappa
- Re: "class E" (was: Consensus Call: draft-weil-sh… Bob Hinden
- Re: "class E" (was: Consensus Call: draft-weil-sh… Nick Hilliard
- Re: "class E" (was: Consensus Call: draft-weil-sh… David Conrad
- Re: "class E" (was: Consensus Call: draft-weil-sh… Noel Chiappa
- Re: "class E" (was: Consensus Call: draft-weil-sh… John C Klensin
- Re: "class E" (was: Consensus Call: draft-weil-sh… Chris Donley
- Re: "class E" (was: Consensus Call: draft-weil-sh… Mark Andrews
- Re: "class E" (was: Consensus Call: draft-weil-sh… Mark Andrews
- Re: "class E" (was: Consensus Call: draft-weil-sh… Mark Andrews
- Re: "class E" (was: Consensus Call: draft-weil-sh… David Conrad
- Re: "class E" (was: Consensus Call: draft-weil-sh… Måns Nilsson
- Re: "class E" (was: Consensus Call: draft-weil-sh… Mark Andrews
- Re: "class E" (was: Consensus Call: draft-weil-sh… Eliot Lear
- Re: "class E" (was: Consensus Call: draft-weil-sh… Mark Andrews
- Re: "class E" (was: Consensus Call: draft-weil-sh… Benson Schliesser
- Re: "class E" (was: Consensus Call: draft-weil-sh… Måns Nilsson