> > As stated in Subsection 4.A. of the "Revamp The > Internet" whitepaper, all need be done is "Simply disable the existing > software codes that have been disabling the use of the 240/4 netblock." >
Some friendly feedback. The phrase "all that needs to be done" , is exceptionally reductive, and in the case of internet standards, also always going to end up being wrong. On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 11:19 AM Abraham Y. Chen <ayc...@avinta.com> wrote: > Dear Mark: > > 0) Thanks for the clarification. I understand. A short message through > the cyberspace, especially between parties who have never met can be > easily skewed. I am glad that I asked you, instead of taking it > negatively without raising my hand. > > 1) "...I'd, rather, expend those resources on IPv6, 464XLAT, e.t.c. ... > ": Since EzIP is still being further refined, it may not be clear in our > documentation about how much work is required to get the IPv4 out of the > current depletion mode. As stated in Subsection 4.A. of the "Revamp The > Internet" whitepaper, all need be done is "Simply disable the existing > software codes that have been disabling the use of the 240/4 netblock." > In fact, we have found examples that this means commenting out one line > code that searches for then discards packets with 240/4 addressing. It > seems to me that there is no easier task than this. > > https://www.avinta.com/phoenix-1/home/RevampTheInternet.pdf > > Regards, > > Abe (2022-11-21 11:18 EST) > > > > On 2022-11-20 23:56, Mark Tinka wrote: > > > > > > On 11/20/22 19:02, Abraham Y. Chen wrote: > > > >> Dear Mark: > >> > >> 0) I am surprised at your apparently sarcastic opinion. > >> > >> 1) The EzIP proposal as referenced by my last MSG is the result of > >> an in-depth system engineering effort. Since the resultant schemes do > >> not rely on any protocol development, IETF does not need be involved. > >> Especially, its first step of disabling one line of existing > >> networking program code empowers any party to begin deploying EzIP > >> stealthily for mitigating the IPv4 address pool depletion issues. > >> Note that EzIP is a generic solution applicable to everyone, not > >> limited to Africa. > >> > >> 2) Of course, constructive criticism is always appreciated. However, > >> unspecific comments that confuse and distract the readers only > >> provide dis-service to those disadvantaged population who are > >> enduring the handicaps of being the late-comers to the Internet. > > > > My comment was not directed at you. Sorry. > > > > I have nothing against the EzIP proposal. It just does not add any > > real value in solving the IPv4 depletion problem for the amount of > > effort required to implement it, in my view. I'd, rather, expend those > > resources on IPv6, 464XLAT, e.t.c. > > > > Mark. > > > > > -- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > www.avast.com >