What makes you think Cisco want IPv4+ addresses?
Can you conceive how many IPv6 addresses they already have?
Please, for the love of sanity, stop replying and keeping this thread going, this is not the place to thrash out your concept.
You have been given many examples of issues with your idea and you solve them all by saying companies like Cisco will happily upgrade
EOL products along with all existing and future products to obtain some IPv4+ addresses. We all know this is nonsense.
Please, stop.
Respectfully,
Stuart Willet.
From: Elad Cohen [mailto:elad@netstyle.io]
Sent: 26 April 2020 12:20
To: Stuart Willet (primary) <stu@safehosts.co.uk>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net>; members-discuss@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Technical solution to resolve the IPv4 Exhaustion problem and to add more 4, 294, 967, 296 IPv4 addresses that are needed in the world
Cisco as part of the round table, will receive high amount of IPv4+ addresses, they are equally worth to money.
You wrote millions of dollars
100,000,000 new IPv4 addresses (from IPv4+) that will be provided to everyone involved including ASN's and ISP's and Operating System vendors and netowrking equipment manufacturers
- are worth in total 2 Billion USD , this is much more than the few millions dollars that you wrote.
" If providers have not implemented IPv6 on EOL devices, why on earth would they implement IPv4+?"
- because I believe that there will be pressure from the community and it will be benefited to them.
Respectfully,
Elad
From: Stuart Willet (primary) <stu@safehosts.co.uk>
Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:56 PM
To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net>;
members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net>
Subject: RE: [members-discuss] Technical solution to resolve the IPv4 Exhaustion problem and to add more 4, 294, 967, 296 IPv4 addresses that are needed in the world
You STILL don’t see the issue?
Who is going to pay for all the development?
How will Cisco provide updates for EOL kit?
This is ONLY a partial list of Cisco kit.
There will be thousands of devices from different suppliers which are EOL and will need someone to work out how to update them.
This would cost millions of dollars to do worldwide, it just isn’t practical.
If providers have not implemented IPv6 on EOL devices, why on earth would they implement IPv4+?
EOL = End Of Life, unsupported.
Best,
Stuart Willet.
From: Elad Cohen [mailto:elad@netstyle.io]
Sent: 26 April 2020 11:52
To: Stuart Willet (primary) <stu@safehosts.co.uk>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net>;
members-discuss@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Technical solution to resolve the IPv4 Exhaustion problem and to add more 4, 294, 967, 296 IPv4 addresses that are needed in the world
Any home-modem will not need to be updated (no matter if it is L2 or L3).
Regarding the EOL list you provided, Cisco will be part of the round table (just like any other routing equipment manufacturer) and firmware upgrades will be provided by any round
table member even for its EOL products so the deployment of IPv4+ will be possible.
Respectfully,
Elad
From: Stuart Willet (primary) <stu@safehosts.co.uk>
Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:48 PM
To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net>;
members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net>
Subject: RE: [members-discuss] Technical solution to resolve the IPv4 Exhaustion problem and to add more 4, 294, 967, 296 IPv4 addresses that are needed in the world
You keep saying “Any home modem will not need to be updated at all”
and you keep saying switches are L2.
My home modem is a L3 device.
There are a lot of L3 switches which have hit end of life in lots of data centres around the world.
Regardless of how many times you SAY these are L2 switches, they are not.
By way of example, here is just a handful of Cisco’s EOL Layer 3 (IP based) devices which would need some kind of upgrade or replacement:
Cisco 6000 Series IP DSL Switches
Cisco Blade Switches for Dell
Cisco Blade Switches for HP
Cisco Catalyst 3750 Series Switches
Cisco Catalyst 3750-X Series Switches
Cisco Catalyst 3560 Series Switches
Cisco Catalyst 3560-C Series Switches
Cisco Catalyst 3560-X Series Switches
Cisco Catalyst 2960 Series Switches
Cisco Catalyst 2960-S Series Switches
Cisco Catalyst 2960-SF Series Switches
Cisco Catalyst 2955 Series Switches
Cisco Catalyst 2360 Series Switches
Cisco Energy Management Suite
Cisco ME 4600 Series Multiservice Optical Access Platform
Cisco ME 3800X Series Carrier Ethernet Switch Routers
Cisco ME 3600X Series Ethernet Access Switches
Cisco ME 3400E Series Ethernet Access Switches
Cisco ME 2600X Series Ethernet Access Switches
Cisco Nexus 4000 Series Switches
Cisco Nexus 1100 Series Cloud Services Platforms
Cisco Small Business 500 Series Stackable Managed Switches
Cisco Small Business 100 Series Unmanaged Switches
Cisco Switch Modules for IBM
Cisco Virtual Application Cloud Segmentation (VACS) Services
Citrix NetScaler 1000V
Remember, this is only Cisco and only a partial list.
You will need to add Juniper, HP, Dell, D-Link, Alcatel, Foundry, Marconi, Nortel and many many more.
You will also need to update EVERY distro of Linux, Unix, Windows and other more bespoke operating systems.
Best,
Stuart Willet.
From: Elad Cohen [mailto:elad@netstyle.io]
Sent: 26 April 2020 11:18
To: Stuart Willet (primary) <stu@safehosts.co.uk>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net>;
members-discuss@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Technical solution to resolve the IPv4 Exhaustion problem and to add more 4, 294, 967, 296 IPv4 addresses that are needed in the world
I already answered to you one minute ago. No software update will need to be done to any modem, I wrote it many many times but you ignored it - so please don't blame it on me.
Here is again:
Any home modem will not need to be updated at all
Respectfully,
Elad
From: Stuart Willet (primary) <stu@safehosts.co.uk>
Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:16 PM
To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net>;
members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net>
Subject: RE: [members-discuss] Technical solution to resolve the IPv4 Exhaustion problem and to add more 4, 294, 967, 296 IPv4 addresses that are needed in the world
Show me how to “software update” my BT modem to accept iPv4 (rhetorical)
I’m sorry, but you have had plenty of feedback from lots of people.
You refuse to see the obvious, nobody is going to spend the man hours required.
I am now respectfully bowing out, I have wasted enough time on this.
Please feel free to tell people I am part of an IPv6 conspiracy against you, but also accept that this is nonsense.
Best regards,
Stuart Willet.
From: Elad Cohen [mailto:elad@netstyle.io]
Sent: 26 April 2020 11:07
To: Stuart Willet (primary) <stu@safehosts.co.uk>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net>;
members-discuss@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Technical solution to resolve the IPv4 Exhaustion problem and to add more 4, 294, 967, 296 IPv4 addresses that are needed in the world
But you didn't understand IPv4+ based on what you are writing or you are trying to influence the readers...
First fully understand something, then decide if you are against it or not.
Regarding:
"you want millions of dollars spent on millions of upgrades for a handful of new IPv4 addresse"
No hardware upgrades will be need, only software updates and the software developers (operating system vendors and routing equipment manufacturers) will receive incentives. End-users
/ companies / organizations - will need to invest nothing.
Respectfully,
Elad
From: Stuart Willet (primary) <stu@safehosts.co.uk>
Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:03 PM
To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net>;
members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net>
Subject: RE: [members-discuss] Technical solution to resolve the IPv4 Exhaustion problem and to add more 4, 294, 967, 296 IPv4 addresses that are needed in the world
You have not convinced me, I make no money from IPv6.
I have no incentive to push IPv6 or downplay IPv4 or IPV4+
Your idea is flawed and that’s that.
Sorry,
Stuart Willet.
From: Elad Cohen [mailto:elad@netstyle.io]
Sent: 26 April 2020 11:00
To: Stuart Willet (primary) <stu@safehosts.co.uk>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net>;
members-discuss@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Technical solution to resolve the IPv4 Exhaustion problem and to add more 4, 294, 967, 296 IPv4 addresses that are needed in the world
Stuart,
The people that responded are not reflecting the opinion of the vast majority of internet companies and internet organizations - which needs IPv4.
Each and every person that I wasn't able to convince as you wrote is an active deployer of IPv6 and earns his money from deploying IPv6.
Respectfully,
Elad
From: Stuart Willet (primary) <stu@safehosts.co.uk>
Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 12:54 PM
To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net>;
members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net>
Subject: RE: [members-discuss] Technical solution to resolve the IPv4 Exhaustion problem and to add more 4, 294, 967, 296 IPv4 addresses that are needed in the world
Elad,
You are now making yourself look a little paranoid and silly.
Respectfully,
Stuart Willet.
From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net]
On Behalf Of Elad Cohen
Sent: 26 April 2020 10:53
To: Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net>;
members-discuss@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Technical solution to resolve the IPv4 Exhaustion problem and to add more 4, 294, 967, 296 IPv4 addresses that are needed in the world
Sander is taking part in an illegal cyber influence operation against me.
Sander, instead of lying and acting like a coward with other interests, go ahead and ask me publicly any question that you would like regarding IPv4+ and you will be answered.
Respectfully,
Elad
From: Sander Steffann
Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 12:40 PM
To: Elad Cohen
Cc: Gert Döring; members-discuss@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Technical solution to resolve the IPv4 Exhaustion problem and to add more 4, 294, 967, 296 IPv4 addresses that are needed in the world
Hi,
> What being done here is a cyber influence operation against me, after I'm only trying to do good to the community.
>
> Sander, you didn't mention any flaws, can you please write them here and I will answer each and every one of them ?
This is not the place Elad. Many flaws have been pointed out to you already, but you just dismiss them. Take this to the IETF, you'll feel right at home… *
Cheers,
Sander
* for those who don't follow the IETF, there is an appeal ongoing about IETF chairs and ADs ignoring inconvenient questions and objections