[182415] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Barry Shein)
Thu Jul 16 12:40:08 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Barry Shein <bzs@world.std.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 12:39:58 -0400
To: "Ricky Beam" <jfbeam@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <op.x1t4fohctfhldh@rbeam.xactional.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Yeah wow 127/8, that one always amazed me, 16M addrs because it was
computationally cheap to test for ((0x7f & addr) == 0x7f).
I wonder what are the most 127.* addrs ever used by one site? I know
there are some schemes which blackhole to 127.0.0.n incrementing n so
the number of hits on each blackhole can be counted separately (more
or less) but 16M? I doubt even 254 were used in those schemes very
often.
WWWT? (What Were We Thinking?)
Oh well water under the bridge.
On July 15, 2015 at 17:53 jfbeam@gmail.com (Ricky Beam) wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 17:34:13 -0400, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
> > That covers multicast and RFC-1918. Are there any other IPv4
> > segmentations that you can think of?
> ...
> > Given that we came up with 3 total segmentations in IPv4 over the course
>
> #1-3,#4 RFC-1918 is 3 "segments" and we recently added a 4th (for CGN).
> #5 Localhost (127/8)
> #6 Multicast (224/4)
> #7 "Class E" (240/4)
> #8 0/8
> #9 255/8 (technically, part of class e, but it's called out specifically
> in various RFCs)
--
-Barry Shein
The World | bzs@TheWorld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 800-THE-WRLD | Dial-Up: US, PR, Canada
Software Tool & Die | Public Access Internet | SINCE 1989 *oo*
