News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Reclaiming IPv4 Class E's 240.0.0.0/4. Parent comment

Re:Reclaiming IPv4 Class E's 240.0.0.0/4 by jcranmer on Monday May 27, 2024 @02:14PM (#40493154)
In other words, your proposal establishes only not-IPv4<->not-IPv4 communication over an IPv4 tunnel, which is something actual IPv6 has had for decades?

(There's also the interesting question of how not-IPv4 addresses are supposed to get their not-IPv4 addresses if the entity they get their IP addresses from doesn't support not-IPv4.)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Reclaiming IPv4 Class E's 240.0.0.0/4 by jedberg on Monday May 27, 2024 @02:17PM (#40493174)
No, it establishes a path for piecemeal upgrades to the infrastructure that is cross compatible with IPv4.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Reclaiming IPv4 Class E's 240.0.0.0/4 by jcranmer on Monday May 27, 2024 @02:28PM (#40493281)
I'm not seeing it... can you clearly explain specifically what scenarios your not-IPv4 deployment strategy enables that doesn't exist with IPv6 today?

(If you're going to say "not-IPv4 local network with IPv4 ISP", then clearly explain how the not-IPv4 local network is supposed to get its not-IPv4 address, and why that is materially different from existing IPv6 tunnel options.)

[ Parent | on HN ]