Agreed! > -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Donley [mailto:C.Donley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 3:14 PM > To: Ronald Bonica; IESG IESG; IETF Discussion > Subject: Re: Consensus Call: draft-weil-shared-transition-space-request > > Ron, > > One point of clarification, in your *against* list, you include: > > > On 11/28/11 2:25 PM, "Ronald Bonica" <rbonica@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >- Some applications will break. These applications share the > >characteristic of assuming that an interface is globally reachable if > it > >is numbered by an non-RFC 1918 address. To date, the only application > >that has been identified as breaking is 6to4, but others may be > >identified in the future. > > Since this address space is between the CPE router and CGN device, and > is > therefore not globally routable, the same application(s) (e.g. 6to4) > will > break if public or 'squat' space are used instead of shared CGN space. > Such applications rely on the home router detecting that there is > private, > non-globally routable space (i.e. RFC1918) on the WAN and disabling > such > an application. While that same detection code will always fail for > public address space and squat space since the exact range is not > defined, > there is the possibility of fixing the detection code in home routers > if > we do define shared CGN space for that purpose. > > Chris _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf