> On Feb 10, 2021, at 06:11 , Bjørn Mork <bj...@mork.no> wrote:
>
> Ca By <cb.li...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> The 3 cellular networks in the usa, 100m subs each, use ipv6 to uniquely
>> address customers. And in the case of ims (telephony on a celluar), it is
>> ipv6-only, afaik.
>
> I certainly agree that this is easier and makes more sense. I just
> don't buy the "can't be done" wrt using rfc1918.
>
>
> Bjørn
The argument was that you can’t run out of RFC-1918 without incompetence.
You don’t have to be incompetent to decide that partitioning your network is a
bad idea for
multiple (I would think obvious) reasons.
Trying to allow arbitrary phone calls between 100M subscribers (5+ copies of
RFC-1918 space)
where any endpoint may need to reach any other endpoint involves some mapping
gymnastics
that would make SS7 look like child’s play.
Cable providers did, in some cases go with partitioned networks for set-top
management,
but I don’t know anyone who was involved in building or maintaining or
troubleshooting those
systems that doesn’t curse them.
Owen
