Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public

[Matt Palmer <mpalmer () hezmatt org>]

On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 01:45:04PM -1000, scott wrote:
> On 11/17/2021 1:29 PM, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> > This seems like a really bad idea to me; am I really the only one who noticed?
> >
> > https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-schoen-intarea-unicast-127-00.html
>
> https://github.com/schoen/unicast-extensions
>
> ------------------
>
> Fixing the odd nooks and crannies still mildly broken in IPv4, by:
>
>  * Making class-e (240/4), 0/8, 127/8, 224/4 more usable
>  * Adding 419 million new IPs to the world
>  * Fixing zeroth networking
>    <https://github.com/schoen/unicast-extensions/blob/master/ZEROTH.md>
>  * Improving interoperability with multiple protocols and tunnelling
>    technologies
>  * Supplying tested patches and tools that address these problems
>
> ------------------
>
> Some of these are hardcoded in ASICs, I believe.  Change that! ;)

Probably easier to change the ASICs than it'll be to get those "tested
patches" they've apparently written deployed to the millions of Windows XP
boxes still out there.

- Matt