[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
On Jan 31, 2011, at 10:43 PM, George Bonser wrote:
>> 3. Busting out 16 more /8s only delays the IPv4 endgame by about a
> If used for general assignment, sure. But if used for what people have
> been begging for NAT444 middle-4 space. Well, that might work. Code
> update on the CPE is all it would take. The systems involved would
> never see it.
If they could do code updates on the CPE, then, they could use RFC-1918.
The problem is that code-updating that much CPE is, well, impractical to
say the least.
- From: carlosm3011 at gmail.com (Carlos M. Martinez)