[lacnog] Making Use of 240/4 NetBlock Re 202203132150.AYC

[Abraham Y. Chen]

Hi, Tomas:

1)    "  ... would have to plan the upgrade of all of our routers, spend 
days programming the upgrade, spend nights in maintenance windows, maybe 
pay for remote hands, etc. ...
the cost of the so-called EzIP is not minimal.":    Perhaps you did not 
recognize three characteristics of the EzIP scheme in this respect:

     A.    It is an incremental enhancement (more addresses become 
usable). It does not require end-user upgrade. So, it does not interfere 
existing operations,

     B.    It is localized within a RAN (Regional Area Network), or a 
partial branch of such, and generally deploys down-stream. So, it should 
be within one Network Operator's sole jurisdiction,

     C.    It is a "generic" type of software upgrade. That is, all 
equipment from manufacturers using the same root software block are 
likely making the same code change.

     As such, the software update for EzIP operation may be done as part 
of periodical debugging type of down-loads, not extra burden on 
operator's staff. Then, the added capability can be idle in the updated 
equipment until down stream facility is ready to take advantage of the 
expanded capability. From my knowledge of equipment maintenance, this is 
no big deal. Although this is not without efforts, it would be finite 
compared to the IPv6 deployment that requires wide spread compatibility 
through the Internet (cooperation of both ends of a link), before the 
roll-out of the capability is feasible.


Hope this clarifies your concern.


Regards,



Abe (2022-03 13 23:13 EDT)


> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Resumen de LACNOG, Vol 171, Envío 10
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2022 10:34:35 -0500
> From: Tomas Lynch<tomas.lynch en gmail.com>
> To: Latin America and Caribbean Region Network Operators Group
> 	<lacnog en lacnic.net>
> Subject: Re: [lacnog] Making Use of 240/4 NetBlock Re:
> 	202203112350.AYC
> Message-ID:
> 	<CAGEujU8MwZx7-PzmKHpyOWjDj9gUSRa6aGsOwB_XVEB86yOd6w en mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> This part of the proposal doesn't have in mind the operations of a network:
>
>>   A.    Disable the program codes in current routers that have been
> disabling the use of the 240/4 NetBlock. The cost of this software
> engineering should be minimal.
>
> Yes, let's say that the cost for Vendor A could be minimal: they will
> remove some lines in the code for version X.Y and release version X.Y-EzIP
> without bugs triggered by removing those lines. Then, we, the operators,
> would have to plan the upgrade of all of our routers, spend days
> programming the upgrade, spend nights in maintenance windows, maybe pay for
> remote hands, etc., just to extend for a few more days the inevitable agony
> of IPv4.
>
> Thus, the cost of the so-called EzIP is not minimal.
>
>
>


-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
------------ próxima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un adjunto en formato HTML...
URL: <https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/lacnog/attachments/20220313/209b751a/attachment.htm>