RE: Overlay broad patent on IPv6?

["Tony Hain" <alh-ietf () tndh net>]

There is prior art here, and likely patents held by HP
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bound-dstm-exp-04


> -----Original Message-----
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces () nanog org] On Behalf Of Baldur
> Norddahl
> Sent: Monday, July 13, 2015 10:10 AM
> To: nanog () nanog org
> Subject: Fwd: Overlay broad patent on IPv6?
>
> Nah what you describe is a different invention. Someone probably already
> has a patent on that.
>
> The browser will do a DNS lookup on slashdot.org and then cache that -
> forever (or until you restart the browser). Yes it will ignore the TTL (apps
> don't get the TTL at all, so apps don't know). Same happens if you ssh to
> yourserver.someplace.com. One DNS lookup, the traffic sticks there forever
> or until the session is terminated. DNS is horrible for this.
>
> If they had a IPv4 internal private network going you would not need to
> hook unto the DNS at all. Just get IP address when something wants to be
> routed out the WAN port. Also the NAT table is a good indicator of when
> you can release the address again.
>
> On other words, that would work, but the system described in the patent
> app wont.
>
> Of course both systems are useless. I can not imagine any end user that
> wont have a ton of IPv4 going on for the next decade to come. And when
> time comes, we are more likely to NAT64 than this.
>
> Regards,
>
> Baldur
>
>
>
>
>
> On 13 July 2015 at 18:04, Blake Dunlap <ikiris () gmail com> wrote:
>
> > The point is you'd already have a 192 address or something, and it
> > would only grab the external address for a short duration for use as
> > an external PAT address, thus oversubscribing the ip4 pool to users
> > who need it (based on dns). Its still pretty broken, but less broken
> > than you describe.
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 8:55 AM,  <A.L.M.Buxey () lboro ac uk> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > > This is actually a good idea. Roll out an IPV6 only network and
> > > > only
> > pass
> > > > out an IPV4 address if it's needed based on actual traffic.
> > >
> > > yes...shame someones applied for a patent on that! ;-)
> > >
> > > alan