Re: 240/4

["Brandon Galbraith" <brandon.galbraith () gmail com>]

On 10/18/07, Alain Durand <alain_durand () cable comcast com> wrote:

> On 10/18/07 12:53 PM, "Jon Lewis" <jlewis () lewis org> wrote:
>
> > I could see bits of 240/4 perhaps being of use to large cable companies
> > for whom there just isn't enough 1918 space to address all their CPE
> > gear...and/or they really want unique addressing so that if/when
> networks
> > merge IP conflicts are avoided.
>
> I do work for one of those "large cable companies" and no, 240/4 is not
> useable for us either for the exact same reasons that you pointed out to
> explain why 240/4 will not work in public space: there are just too many
> devices that can't easily be upgraded.
>
>    - Alain.


Alain,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Comcast started moving to IPv6 addressing
*because* they ran out of 10. space.

My 0.02: Hacking together IPv4 solutions involving retasking previously
reserved address space simply delays the inevitable exhaustion of said
address space.

-brandon