nanog mailing list archives

Re: 240/4


From: Adrian Chadd <adrian () creative net au>
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:21:25 +0800


On Fri, Oct 19, 2007, Joe Greco wrote:

So is this a statement that Cisco is volunteering to provide free binary
patches for its entire product line?  Including the really old stuff
that happens to be floating around out there and still in use?

Considering there's forklift upgrades required to support changes in
technology anyway, I see this as not a problem. People can choose if
they'd like to use that space.

People -chose- to use some new IP space which had once been bogon
space and then spent quite a bit of time figuring out why the hell
customers couldn't reach the general internet. People adapted.


The day you guys release a set of free binary patches for all your
previous products, including stuff like the old Compatible Systems
line, old Cisco gear like the 2500, and old Linksys products, then
I'll be happy to concede that I could be wrong and that vendors might
actually make it possible for IPv4-240+ to be usable.

You know, Cisco do release updates to old IOS software periodically.
ISTR seeing a Cisco 2500 IOS update -this year-. Yup:

 c2500-is-l.123-23.bin          16      16      25-JUL-2007

Its so not out of the realm of possibility Cisco, just as an example
of one vendor of $LOTS, would do a software rebuild run just for this
particular issue. 

All IETF "has to do" is possibly reclassify 240/4 from "experimental/future
use" to "experimental unicast space" to satisfy the vendors that would
block on 240/4 being routable and satisfy those who are worried that
putting it on the public internet is bad (and I'm one of them for now);
then let the market decide what they want to do.





Adrian


Current thread: