[125633] in North American Network Operators' Group
IPV4 and IPV6 question
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (jbfixurpc@gmail.com)
Tue Apr 20 15:42:19 2010
From: <jbfixurpc@gmail.com>
To: <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 15:41:31 -0400
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Greetings,
<flame_suit_on>
This may seem like a stupid question, but in IPV4 there are a few
"reserved" bits which I've not seen used, but perhaps I am behind the =
times.
With regard to these, what if one was to use such to delegate a second =
venue
of IP space? In otherwords flip a bit in the flags reserved <
http://www.networksorcery.com/enp/protocol/ip.htm#Flags > and now its
considered IPV4.2 ... Would that not give a second range of IP address =
space
to use? Granted there would be a ton of upgrades/updates to enable such, =
but
sounds a little bit simplier than an IPV6 upgrade, maybe? I am on the =
fence
regarding IPV6 as there have been many logical arguments pro and con
regarding its deployment. I still have to wonder about these "reserved"
bits, that seem never to be used, why not use them? Again perhaps I am
behind the times and all of the bits are being used. Just my 2 cents.=20
</flame_suit_on>
Kind regards
-Joe
