Re: Class D addresses? was: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public

[Jim <mysidia () gmail com>]

On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 1:02 PM Michael Thomas <mike () mtcc com> wrote:
> On 11/20/21 10:44 AM, Chris Adams wrote:

> that it needs 400M addresses. If you wanted to reclaim ipv4 addresses it
> seems that class D and class E would be a much better target than loopback.
> Mike, not that I have any stake in this

400M addresses may be excessive,  but not so much the Low-hanging fruit
you seemed to suggest.  May be worth the consideration to reduce,
but need to see your draft standard first,  about what exactly you propose to
reclaim from class D..

Unlike class E and 127/8,  there are many protocols and applications that
communicate between separate devices on a network over class D in a
non-unicast manner to contend with that utilize either official MC assignments,
or Private/org-specific assignments from available class D space

 - Multicast/broadcast addresses used by many control systems such as
routing protocols (VRRP),
camera systems / physical security,  etc.

--
-JH