[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

Your home BT modem doesn't need to have any software update and will work 100% with IPv4+.

End of life switching equipment is layer 2 and hence not related to IP and irrelevant and will not need to to be updated at all.

Regarding end of life routing equipment - if it is a router with no more than two physical routes - then it will not need to be updated at all - otherwise IT technician should do what it can in the network design for the specific marginal end of life routing equipment to have two physical routes if we want IPv4+ packets to go over properly through it, for example to switch that router with another not end-of-life router that can be upgraded while the new location of the end of life router will not have more than two physical routes. Creativity needs to come in here. This is a marginal case.

Respectfully,
Elad
________________________________
From: Stuart Willet (primary) <stu at safehosts.co.uk>
Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:07 PM
To: Elad Cohen <elad at netstyle.io>; Sander Steffann <sander at steffann.nl>; Gert Döring <gert at space.net>
Cc: members-discuss at ripe.net <members-discuss at 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


How will you “software update” my home BT modem?
How will you “software update” the end of life routing and switching equipment?



And, most importantly, who will pay for development and rollout?



From: Elad Cohen [mailto:elad at netstyle.io]
Sent: 26 April 2020 11:06
To: Stuart Willet (primary) <stu at safehosts.co.uk>; Sander Steffann <sander at steffann.nl>; Gert Döring <gert at space.net>
Cc: members-discuss at 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 at safehosts.co.uk<mailto:stu at safehosts.co.uk>>
Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 1:02 PM
To: Elad Cohen <elad at netstyle.io<mailto:elad at netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander at steffann.nl<mailto:sander at steffann.nl>>; Gert Döring <gert at space.net<mailto:gert at space.net>>
Cc: members-discuss at ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net> <members-discuss at ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss at 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,



I am against your idea, you have not won me over and I don’t think you are likely to.

I have repeatedly said this will not work.



It’s a nice idea, and would have had promise if it was introduced before IPv6 but as things stand today, you want millions of dollars spent on millions of upgrades for a handful of new IPv4 addresses.



As I said, if you are having this much trouble introducing it to us, you don’t stand a chance.





Best,



Stuart Willet.



From: Elad Cohen [mailto:elad at netstyle.io]
Sent: 26 April 2020 10:59
To: Stuart Willet (primary) <stu at safehosts.co.uk<mailto:stu at safehosts.co.uk>>; Sander Steffann <sander at steffann.nl<mailto:sander at steffann.nl>>; Gert Döring <gert at space.net<mailto:gert at space.net>>
Cc: members-discuss at ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss at 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,



I don't have any trouble convincing you, 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 at safehosts.co.uk<mailto:stu at safehosts.co.uk>>
Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 12:46 PM
To: Elad Cohen <elad at netstyle.io<mailto:elad at netstyle.io>>; Sander Steffann <sander at steffann.nl<mailto:sander at steffann.nl>>; Gert Döring <gert at space.net<mailto:gert at space.net>>
Cc: members-discuss at ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net> <members-discuss at ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss at 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



Respectfully Elad, you are pushing your idea without considering the consequences.

There is no operation against you, we are just trying to point out the flaws in your idea.

Just consider this, you are currently speaking with the group that will inevitably be the ones to roll out your idea. If you are having this much trouble convincing us this is a good idea, how would the rest of the world hold up?



You keep saying this will work with existing IPv4 but it simply won’t will it.

I have a home internet connection provided by BT. They give me an IPv4 and an IPv6 address.

Traffic preferences IPv6 where it can.



How would IPv4+ be added in this scenario? Simple, a firmware update would need to be made on my router. And every router for every other BT customer.
Same will apply for VirginMedia et-al.

You keep saying it won’t be needed unless there is NAT, but most home routers use NAT.

Please explain to me how you think Microsoft are going to spend millions on your upgrade for zero benefit to them?
Please explain how ISP’s will recall and replace millions of set top boxes and modems?
Please explain how upgrades are going to be done on end of life switches and routers?

Please explain how every DNS server on the planet will be upgraded seamlessly?



Seriously, if you are having this hard a time winning us over, you don’t stand a chance.



Best,



Stuart Willet.



From: members-discuss [mailto:members-discuss-bounces at ripe.net] On Behalf Of Elad Cohen
Sent: 26 April 2020 10:37
To: Sander Steffann <sander at steffann.nl<mailto:sander at steffann.nl>>; Gert Döring <gert at space.net<mailto:gert at space.net>>
Cc: members-discuss at ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss at 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



Hello Everyone,



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 ?



First there was the IPv6 fans and now there are the Spamhaus fans.



Respectfully,

Elad

________________________________

From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces at ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss-bounces at ripe.net>> on behalf of Sander Steffann <sander at steffann.nl<mailto:sander at steffann.nl>>
Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2020 12:28 PM
To: Gert Döring <gert at space.net<mailto:gert at space.net>>
Cc: members-discuss at ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net> <members-discuss at ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss at 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,

> On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 10:51:13AM +0200, Bruno Cordioli wrote:
>> I think it is appropriate to close this discussion here.
>> Elad will eventually submit his proposed al RIPE meeting or he'll write a
>> RFC.
>
> Basically, this.

Seconded

> [...]
>
> Overall, as long as no implementations can be provided (source code on
> github etc) this sounds like a somewhat cheap shot to make people believe
> you're going to solve their IPv4 problems if they just vote you to the
> NCC executive board.  And I hope the NCC members are smart enough to not
> vote based on glorious promises, but on track record, provable background,
> etc.

I have contacted Elad off-list and shown him many fallacies in his design. He insisted implementation and deployment of IPv4+ was easy. I told him he is delusional and that I emailed him off-list as not to shame him publicly, and all he said was:

> Go ahead, shame me publicly and you will receive the exact same answers, you are obviously have interests regarding IPv6 and you are trying to avoid from the world more IPv4 addresses just for your own personal profit.
>
> You are obviously have illegal interests in Ripe and this is the only reasons for your emails to me.

There is no talking sense into this person. He is oblivious to how the internet works and how hardware and software upgrades are implemented and deployed. Obviously pointing out his flaws means I have an illegal interest somehow.

I think Elad has already tried following Trump's recent advice and we are seeing the consequences…

Time to move on…
Sander
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20200426/4350b87e/attachment.html>