On Wed, 8 Aug 2007, Douglas Otis wrote:
Some larger providers and private organizations who depend upon private IPv4
addresses have complained there is no suitably large "private" IP address
range which can assure each user within their network can obtain a unique
private IP address. It would seem class E could, and might already, function
as a larger "private" IP address range.
They also need to route it locally. Guess what kind of problems they'd
run into...
BTW, even if this draft were implimented (which would require changes to
many operating systems, firewalls and local sites configs), it would just
delay ipv4 exhausting by about 2 years, not allow to avoid it. What should
be done is greater effrot to migrate to ipv6 including supporting ides
like (some are from ppml):
1. requirying at all RIRs that new ipv4 requesters include data on
plans to migrate to ipv6.
2. policy in all RIRs to make it very easy for any existing ipv4
holder to get ipv6 block with no additional fees
3. for vendors have ipv6 on by default on new systems and have it
complain when it can not get ipv6 address from dhcp or can not
do ipv6 routing, etc. That would put pressure on ISPs who will
be asked about ipv6 more and more
4. requirements for ipv6 for renew of ISP contacts by government
and educational institutions (also more pressure to ISPs)
--
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
william@xxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf