nanog mailing list archives
Re: Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8)
From: William Herrin <bill () herrin us>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 23:01:06 -0700
On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 10:36 PM Doug Barton <dougb () dougbarton us> wrote:
So I'll just say this ... if you think that the advice I received from
all of the many people I spoke to (all of whom are/were a lot smarter than me on this topic) was wrong, and that putting the same LOE into IPv6 adoption that it would have taken to make Class E usable was a better investment Doug, "Better investment?" What on earth makes you think it's a zero-sum game? "Same level of effort?" A reasonable level of effort was adding the word "unicast" to the word "reserved" in the standards. Seven letters. A space. Maybe a comma. That would have unblocked everybody else to apply however much or little effort they cared to. Here we are nearly 20 years later and had you not fumbled that ball 240/4 might be broadly enough supported to usefully replace the word "reserved" with something else. You're right about one thing: you won't be able to convince me that your conclusion was rational. No matter how many smart people say a stupid thing, it's still a stupid thing. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin bill () herrin us https://bill.herrin.us/
Current thread:
- Re: 44/8, (continued)
- Re: 44/8 Stephen Satchell (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 Owen DeLong (Jul 22)
- 240/4 (Re: 44/8) Mikael Abrahamsson (Jul 22)
- Re: 240/4 (Re: 44/8) Owen DeLong (Jul 22)
- Re: 240/4 (Re: 44/8) George Herbert (Jul 22)
- Re: 240/4 (Re: 44/8) Ross Tajvar (Jul 22)
- Re: 240/4 (Re: 44/8) Greg Skinner via NANOG (Jul 26)
- Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8) Doug Barton (Jul 26)
- Re: Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8) William Herrin (Jul 26)
- Re: Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8) Doug Barton (Jul 26)
- Re: Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8) William Herrin (Jul 26)
- Re: Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8) Doug Barton (Jul 27)
- Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8) bzs (Jul 27)
- Re: Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8) johnl (Jul 27)
- Re: Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8) Randy Bush (Jul 27)
- Re: Feasibility of using Class E space for public unicast (was re: 44/8) Stephen Satchell (Jul 27)
- Re: 44/8 John Curran (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 William Herrin (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 John Curran (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 Tom Beecher (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 Matt Harris (Jul 22)