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
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<mailto: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
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<mailto: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
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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 12:54 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto: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
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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 12:54 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto: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
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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:03 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 12:54 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto: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
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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:03 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 12:54 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto: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
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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:16 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:03 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 12:54 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto: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
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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:16 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:03 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 12:54 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto: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
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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:48 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:16 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:03 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 12:54 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto: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
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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:48 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:16 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:03 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 12:54 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto: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
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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:56 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:48 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:16 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:03 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 12:54 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io<mailto:elad@netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> <members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto:sander@steffann.nl>> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net<mailto:gert@space.net>>; members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto: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<mailto: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
On Sun Apr 26, 2020 at 11:19:48AM +0000, Elad Cohen wrote:
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.
No, IPv4 addresses attract a high premium price because of their scarcity. Make lots of them available (much like IPv6 does) means that they'll have no market value. It does seem like your proposal is about 'printing' more IPv4 addresses so that IPv4 brokers can make more money out of them. Simon
Dear Elad,
Any home-modem will not need to be updated (no matter if it is L2 or L3).
Ok, let's proceed with your idea: what happens to a service that is only reachable by IPv4+? It will only be reachable by native IPv4+ or by an NAT solution, right? Why re-invent the wheel? There is already IPv6 available, why should someone spend time in developing a NAT for IPv4+? What's the benefit? Affected end-users (with IPv4/IPv6 Dual-Stack devices) will never be able to reach a IPv4+ address (if there is no NAT available). This makes it useless. And regarding your UDP "handshake" for MTU: There are MANY networks around the world which breaks UDP and there are also many situations where you filter UDP. What is your idea for such cases? Best regards Jürgen Von: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> Im Auftrag von Elad Cohen Gesendet: Sonntag, 26. April 2020 12:52 An: Stuart Willet (primary) <stu@safehosts.co.uk>; Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> Cc: Gert Döring <gert@space.net>; members-discuss@ripe.net Betreff: 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) <mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:48 PM To: Elad Cohen <mailto:elad@netstyle.io>; Sander Steffann <mailto:sander@steffann.nl> Cc: Gert Döring <mailto:gert@space.net>; mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net <mailto: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) <mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>; Sander Steffann <mailto:sander@steffann.nl> Cc: Gert Döring <mailto:gert@space.net>; mailto: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) <mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:16 PM To: Elad Cohen <mailto:elad@netstyle.io>; Sander Steffann <mailto:sander@steffann.nl> Cc: Gert Döring <mailto:gert@space.net>; mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net <mailto: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) <mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>; Sander Steffann <mailto:sander@steffann.nl> Cc: Gert Döring <mailto:gert@space.net>; mailto: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) <mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:03 PM To: Elad Cohen <mailto:elad@netstyle.io>; Sander Steffann <mailto:sander@steffann.nl> Cc: Gert Döring <mailto:gert@space.net>; mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net <mailto: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) <mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk>; Sander Steffann <mailto:sander@steffann.nl> Cc: Gert Döring <mailto:gert@space.net>; mailto: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) <mailto:stu@safehosts.co.uk> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 12:54 PM To: Elad Cohen <mailto:elad@netstyle.io>; Sander Steffann <mailto:sander@steffann.nl> Cc: Gert Döring <mailto:gert@space.net>; mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net <mailto: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 <mailto:sander@steffann.nl> Cc: Gert Döring <mailto:gert@space.net>; mailto: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; mailto: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
Elad, There is no cyber influence operation against you. Even though it’s popular these days, you’re olaying Trump with the whole mailing list. I’m amazed, and you should be grateful, that there is so many positive criticism to your idea, and that it’s not just palinly dismissed. But now the discussion has wasted enough bandwidth, green energy, and time. Let it rest, take it to other people and groups as was suggested, see if you can win them over. Or put the same energy at pushing IPv6. In contrast to your idea, IPv6 is there and is a reality. End of the disucssion for me. Cheers Michel Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef> ________________________________ From: Elad Cohen <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 11:54 a.m. To: Sander Steffann 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 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
Hi, many years ago it could have been a good idea.. but even if all of this could be implemented on the software side today... but what about ASICs and so forth? (thinking to circuitry that do lookup based on 32bits for example) Best regards, Thomas Il 26/04/2020 11:52, Elad Cohen ha scritto:
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
_______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/thomas.gallo%40lenfib...
-- Thomas Gallo email: thomas.gallo@lenfiber.it Amministratore unico Lenfiber S.p.A. Centro Direzionale Interporto Padova - Torre B Galleria Spagna, 36 - 35127 Padova (PD) ph: +39 049 85 94 766 fax: +39 049 82 51 032 P.Iva/VAT: IT04669150288 Cap.Soc. 200.000,00 Euro i.v. www.lenfiber.it
ASICs or any device with a similar problem, can be connected to the internet through a NAT router, the NAT router will help the ASIC or the similar device with IPv4+ (The ASIC or the similar device will only be able to initiate connections to IPv4, but any ip addresses in the internet - IPv4 or IPv4+ will be able to initiate a connection to the ASIC or the similar device and then to create a session with it, the NAT router will monitor the session and will set the IPv4+ bits accordingly) In advanced configuration in the NAT router there can be an option that all ip packets that will originate from the specific ASIC will be only to IPv4+ addresses (and not to IPv4) so the NAT router will always set the IPv4+ related bits in any ip packet originated from the ASIC or similar device. Respectfully, Elad ________________________________ From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of Thomas Gallo @ Lenfiber S.p.A. <thomas.gallo@lenfiber.it> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:03 PM To: 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 Hi, many years ago it could have been a good idea.. but even if all of this could be implemented on the software side today... but what about ASICs and so forth? (thinking to circuitry that do lookup based on 32bits for example) Best regards, Thomas Il 26/04/2020 11:52, Elad Cohen ha scritto: 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<mailto: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 _______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list members-discuss@ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/thomas.gallo%40lenfib... -- Thomas Gallo email: thomas.gallo@lenfiber.it<mailto:thomas.gallo@lenfiber.it> Amministratore unico Lenfiber S.p.A. Centro Direzionale Interporto Padova - Torre B Galleria Spagna, 36 - 35127 Padova (PD) ph: +39 049 85 94 766 fax: +39 049 82 51 032 P.Iva/VAT: IT04669150288 Cap.Soc. 200.000,00 Euro i.v. www.lenfiber.it<http://www.lenfiber.it>
Dear Elad, do you know what a ASIC is? Do you know how non-software defined registers work? Let's make it very easy for everyone: Do you ever thought about thinks like firewalls/loadbalancers and their GUIs? About software, that verifies IP-addresses by regex? Your idea is not compatible with existing software. Please share some detailed examples how to bypass such issues. EVEN if the hardware of the (e.g.) firewalls is able to handle the "new" IP addresses of IPv4+: the GUI have to be fixed/updated - on EVERY firewall around the world. Otherwise you'll never have any end-to-end IPv4+ connection. Same counts for software like Webservers (e.g. Apache virtual hosts can refer to IPs in the config), IPTables, databases systems, etc etc. All this software depends on existing network stack but also have configuration verification/testing processes which will not work with (unexpected) IPv4+ addresses in the configuration. What about DHCP, DNS, BGP, Peering fabrics (AMSIX,DECIC, etc) etc? This have to be adapted too. Regarding your "switches are L2 only" statement: did you ever heard about MPLS- and/or L3-switches? They could be EOL/EOS but have full support for IPv4/IPv6 so there is no real statement against using them in existing (closed/company) networks (beside the case of defective hardware). Users of this device will not receive updates from the vendors. What about big vendors? You said it's "easy" and "cheap" to implement: what if hardware line cards like Juniper MPC does not support this? This cards are used in many backbone routers. Should the carriers simple replace them? To be honest: from a theoretical point of view your idea sounds great, but you have to consider way more details / functions / devices / situations /implementations. Your idea is nothing simple to "activate" like an feature. You can't tell a carrier "if your Juniper MPC does not support IPv4+, you have to use NAT" - seriously? With hundreds if Gbps? Best regards Jürgen Von: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> Im Auftrag von Elad Cohen Gesendet: Sonntag, 26. April 2020 12:38 An: Thomas Gallo @ Lenfiber S.p.A. <thomas.gallo@lenfiber.it>; members-discuss@ripe.net Betreff: 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 ASICs or any device with a similar problem, can be connected to the internet through a NAT router, the NAT router will help the ASIC or the similar device with IPv4+ (The ASIC or the similar device will only be able to initiate connections to IPv4, but any ip addresses in the internet - IPv4 or IPv4+ will be able to initiate a connection to the ASIC or the similar device and then to create a session with it, the NAT router will monitor the session and will set the IPv4+ bits accordingly) In advanced configuration in the NAT router there can be an option that all ip packets that will originate from the specific ASIC will be only to IPv4+ addresses (and not to IPv4) so the NAT router will always set the IPv4+ related bits in any ip packet originated from the ASIC or similar device. Respectfully, Elad ________________________________________ From: members-discuss <mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of Thomas Gallo @ Lenfiber S.p.A. <mailto:thomas.gallo@lenfiber.it> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:03 PM To: mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net <mailto: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, many years ago it could have been a good idea.. but even if all of this could be implemented on the software side today... but what about ASICs and so forth? (thinking to circuitry that do lookup based on 32bits for example) Best regards, Thomas Il 26/04/2020 11:52, Elad Cohen ha scritto: 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; mailto: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 _______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/thomas.gallo%40lenfib... -- Thomas Gallo email: mailto:thomas.gallo@lenfiber.it Amministratore unico Lenfiber S.p.A. Centro Direzionale Interporto Padova - Torre B Galleria Spagna, 36 - 35127 Padova (PD) ph: +39 049 85 94 766 fax: +39 049 82 51 032 P.Iva/VAT: IT04669150288 Cap.Soc. 200.000,00 Euro i.v. http://www.lenfiber.it
Dear Jurgen, Your message is great, if there would be more like these we would probably be in the path for IPv4+ I have answers for most of your questions, the rest I need to look into more. The main issue is if the community is open for it or not. I will get back to you on everything you wrote. Please forgive me everyone, I need to complete the post for the technical solution to completely resolve "Email Spam" that will annihilate the illegal anonymous organization "The Spamhaus Project" and I want to post it today. Respectfully, Elad ________________________________ From: Jürgen Jaritsch (juergen.jaritsch@jmpts.ch) <juergen.jaritsch@jmpts.ch> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 2:07 PM To: Elad Cohen <elad@netstyle.io>; members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net> Subject: AW: [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 Dear Elad, do you know what a ASIC is? Do you know how non-software defined registers work? Let's make it very easy for everyone: Do you ever thought about thinks like firewalls/loadbalancers and their GUIs? About software, that verifies IP-addresses by regex? Your idea is not compatible with existing software. Please share some detailed examples how to bypass such issues. EVEN if the hardware of the (e.g.) firewalls is able to handle the "new" IP addresses of IPv4+: the GUI have to be fixed/updated - on EVERY firewall around the world. Otherwise you'll never have any end-to-end IPv4+ connection. Same counts for software like Webservers (e.g. Apache virtual hosts can refer to IPs in the config), IPTables, databases systems, etc etc. All this software depends on existing network stack but also have configuration verification/testing processes which will not work with (unexpected) IPv4+ addresses in the configuration. What about DHCP, DNS, BGP, Peering fabrics (AMSIX,DECIC, etc) etc? This have to be adapted too. Regarding your "switches are L2 only" statement: did you ever heard about MPLS- and/or L3-switches? They could be EOL/EOS but have full support for IPv4/IPv6 so there is no real statement against using them in existing (closed/company) networks (beside the case of defective hardware). Users of this device will not receive updates from the vendors. What about big vendors? You said it's "easy" and "cheap" to implement: what if hardware line cards like Juniper MPC does not support this? This cards are used in many backbone routers. Should the carriers simple replace them? To be honest: from a theoretical point of view your idea sounds great, but you have to consider way more details / functions / devices / situations /implementations. Your idea is nothing simple to "activate" like an feature. You can't tell a carrier "if your Juniper MPC does not support IPv4+, you have to use NAT" - seriously? With hundreds if Gbps? Best regards Jürgen Von: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> Im Auftrag von Elad Cohen Gesendet: Sonntag, 26. April 2020 12:38 An: Thomas Gallo @ Lenfiber S.p.A. <thomas.gallo@lenfiber.it>; members-discuss@ripe.net Betreff: 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 ASICs or any device with a similar problem, can be connected to the internet through a NAT router, the NAT router will help the ASIC or the similar device with IPv4+ (The ASIC or the similar device will only be able to initiate connections to IPv4, but any ip addresses in the internet - IPv4 or IPv4+ will be able to initiate a connection to the ASIC or the similar device and then to create a session with it, the NAT router will monitor the session and will set the IPv4+ bits accordingly) In advanced configuration in the NAT router there can be an option that all ip packets that will originate from the specific ASIC will be only to IPv4+ addresses (and not to IPv4) so the NAT router will always set the IPv4+ related bits in any ip packet originated from the ASIC or similar device. Respectfully, Elad ________________________________________ From: members-discuss <mailto:members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of Thomas Gallo @ Lenfiber S.p.A. <mailto:thomas.gallo@lenfiber.it> Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:03 PM To: mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net <mailto: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, many years ago it could have been a good idea.. but even if all of this could be implemented on the software side today... but what about ASICs and so forth? (thinking to circuitry that do lookup based on 32bits for example) Best regards, Thomas Il 26/04/2020 11:52, Elad Cohen ha scritto: 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; mailto: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 _______________________________________________ members-discuss mailing list mailto:members-discuss@ripe.net https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/thomas.gallo%40lenfib... -- Thomas Gallo email: mailto:thomas.gallo@lenfiber.it Amministratore unico Lenfiber S.p.A. Centro Direzionale Interporto Padova - Torre B Galleria Spagna, 36 - 35127 Padova (PD) ph: +39 049 85 94 766 fax: +39 049 82 51 032 P.Iva/VAT: IT04669150288 Cap.Soc. 200.000,00 Euro i.v. http://www.lenfiber.it
participants (6)
-
Elad Cohen -
Jürgen Jaritsch (juergen.jaritsch＠jmpts.ch) -
Michel Lanners -
Simon Lockhart -
Stuart Willet (primary) -
Thomas Gallo ＠ Lenfiber S.p.A.