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

[Enno Rey <erey () ernw de>]

Hi,

On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 11:01:35AM -0800, Michael Thomas wrote:
> On 11/20/21 10:44 AM, Chris Adams wrote:
>
> []
>
> won out using unicast. Even if it has some niche uses, I seriously doubt 
> 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.

I agree from an efficiency (= ratio of resources used vs. result achieved), but this wouldn't work in practice outside 
isolated environments for the same reasons why the 127/8 is not going to work:
https://theinternetprotocolblog.wordpress.com/2019/10/06/some-notes-on-ipv4-address-space/

For the sake of the thread it should be noted that both the reception of and the response to the initial e-mail 
primarily happened over IPv6.

I wish everybody a great weekend

Enno






-- 
Enno Rey

Cell: +49 173 6745902
Twitter: @Enno_Insinuator