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@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
