Re: A Splendid Example Of A Renumbering Disaster

[Cameron Byrne <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Pete Resnick
<[e-mail]> wrote:
> On 11/23/12 7:46 PM, Sabahattin Gucukoglu wrote:
>>
>> It's Friday.  Time to plug IPv6 some more. :-)
>>
>> http://b.logme.in/2012/11/07/changes-to-hamachi-on-november-19th/
>>
>> LogMeIn Hamachi is basically a NAT-traversing layer 2 VPN solution.  They
>> avoided conflicts with RFC 1918 space by hijacking IPv4 space in 5/8, now
>> actively being allocated by LIRs in Europe.  When that didn't work (see link
>> above), they moved to 25/8, allocated to the UK MoD.  While I'm almost sure
>> that they haven't got it quite so wrong this time, following the comments
>> says that the idea was not only a very bad one to start with, it's cost a
>> lot of people a lot of grief that IPv6 was clearly going to mitigate in
>> renumbering.  Perhaps it is why they recommend it per default, if not for
>> the number of applications that would be broken by it.
>>
>> By the way, is this an application that the new shared transition space
>> might benefit?
>>
>
>
> Yes, like Benson, I am at a loss for why they do not use RFC 6598 addresses.
> That's what someone should tell these goofballs to do.
>

Unfortunately, RFC1918 and RFC 6598 are not enough to number all that
needs numbers.

Lots of love,

Goofball

> pr
>
> --
> Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
> Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - [phone]
>