Re: [v4v6interim] Can we squeeze a tiny topic in the agenda?

On Monday 29 September 2008 11:55:49 ext Geoff Huston, you wrote:
> On 29/09/2008, at 6:41 PM, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
> > On Monday 29 September 2008 10:41:57 ext Andrei Robachevsky, you
> >
> > wrote:
> >> Colleagues,
> >>
> >> I know the agenda is already very full, but I wonder if we could
> >> squeeze
> >> a small topic.
> >>
> >> Coming from the RIR side I'd like to bring up an issue of usability
> >> of
> >> the former class E space (240/4). I know many are sceptical about
> >> this,
> >> but I am not aware of any more or less comprehensive usability tests.
> >> I'd like to discuss the feasibility of such experiment.
> >
> > Linux (until very recently) and Windows 2000/XP will refuse to send
> > any
> > traffic to an address in that range. Also last time I checked, the
> > *BSD
> > kernel routing would discard these destinations, such that you
> > cannot cross a
> > BSD-based router, although BSD "network leaves" can apparently use
> > them
> > (should include OSX). Symbian seems to accept it (not well tested).
> > Haven't checked Windows Vista and 9x, nor big routers.
> >
> > I think it's fair to say that this range is NOT usable with legacy
> > nodes. I
> > suspect the only place you might seriously be able to use it, is
> > between two
> > NATs in the double NAT deployment, and even then I'm suspicious.
>
> I refer you to section 3 of draft-fuller-240space-02.txt for a summary
> of the level of support for use of this addresses in hosts as of March
> 2008  (its an expired draft - 
> http://smakd.potaroo.net/ietf/idref/draft-fuller-240space/index.html holds
> a copy)

And what about routers? Also, I could not find the paragraph explaining the 
plan to upgrade all those hundreds of millions nodes, including _routers_ 
that did not support 240/4 as yet.

I thought the assumption in v4v6 was that IPv4 nodes could not be updated...? 
Just as an example my home NAT-router is still running Linux 2.4.30, and 
that's after I upgraded the firmware - something normal people don't do.

Yes 240/4 could be used in some specific scenarii involving some control over 
all deployed nodes, or on some greenfield network (WiMAX?). Not on the IPv4 
Internet.

-- 
Rémi Denis-Courmont
Maemo Software, Nokia Devices R&D
_______________________________________________
v4v6interim mailing list
v4v6interim@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v4v6interim