On Sep 26, 2011, at 12:47 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 26 Sep 2011, at 18:41 , Keith Moore wrote:
The problem isn't in the difficulty of finding these changes and fixing
them, for currently maintained code. The problem is in the zillions of
systems in the field that have assumptions about 240/4 wired into them, most
of which either have no automatic upgrade mechanism, aren't set up to use
it, or aren't being maintained.
This is the traditional problem with using 240/4, but it doesn't really apply
in this specific case, because those addresses will only be touched by the
CGNs in the ISP network, the routers in the ISP network and the home gateways.
and the "home" gateways _never_ expose their external addresses to internal
hosts or applications? not even via NAT-PMP or UPnP?
(are they really "home" gateways in all cases?)
seems to me that if you're an ISP and have the luxury of upgrading all of the
CPEs, that's a very compelling case for DS-Lite instead of relying on more v4
address space kludges. but of course the devil is in the details.
Keith
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf