Owen DeLong wrote:
The refusal to deploy 240/4 are mostly on the basis that it would take just as
much code effort to do that as it would to put v6 on a box, with the exception
that most boxes already have a v6 stack, so actually more effort, yet yielding
substantially less gain.
Turns out that was wrong for the last 20 years. Time to shut that one
down. It was a stupid self fulfilling mantra from the getgo. As if it is
the place of the IETF to determine how engineers ought to spend their
efforts. Their role is to enable. Not throw up roadblocks. Same here.
Also, your wording is misleading.
More correctly, "the refusal to step out of the way of deployment of
240/4 (by those who may have wished to do so)"
Joe
_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
