Re: IPv4 Address Pool Expanded
Hi, Charles 9:
0) Granted, there are many existing approaches that are capable of similar results. But, you seem to be still beating around:
1) "Except you'll STILL need edge routers.": ER is part of the existing Internet architecture. Why should I not using it? EzIP is doing the best an enhancement should be doing, i.e., leaving the ER alone to do what it has been doing. Do you see problems?
2) "... achieve the same thing with NAT64/NAT46 proxies ... ": Anything touches IPv6 makes many people dizzy. Can we look at a solution without any hint of IPv6, if it is possible to get the job done without IPv6?
3) "Plus by starting fresh, you simplify the routing problems upstream that can lead to additional latency that stacks up over time.": You lost me because this sentence reads rather convoluted. Please expand.
4) "... your plan relies on the Option field, which isn't trusted ... ": I heard rumors about this. But, is this part of the original RFC791 or because the current implementations are not "Kosher"? For the latter, we have the time to fix it because the immediate application of EzIP will leave the current Internet totally intact:
EzIP will empower most (75% or more) nations to begin setting up a new Internet facility in the form of sub-Internet(s) from just one (or more) public IPv4 address already assigned to that country by a RIR (Regional Internet Registry). Then, each of the entire sub-Internets will appear as an ordinary IoT to the rest of the Internet. So, while each country is deploying something new to resolve their current IPv4 address shortage induced problems, nothing in the existing Internet needs be changed at all!
5) The configuration outlined above allows simultaneous performance comparisons between two parallel active systems. It is the ideal situation for consumers among other benefits. I believe this is the philosophy that the "Internet promoters" have always been advertising. Now that we have a real one in our plain sight, everyone should be happy.
Abe (2018-08-22 18:16)