[ih] Class-E extensions?

[Leo Vegoda]

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 5:21 PM Dave Taht <dave at taht.net> wrote:

[...]

> > I believe the main reason they did not progress was that the vast
> > majority of deployed devices would barf at those addresses, which
> > would raise support costs for network operators beyond those incurred
> > by other approaches to providing continued IPv4 connectivity.
>
> Depends on your definition of "barf". If you mean "explodes on contact",
> noo.. If you mean "won't assign, can't connect", that is true, still,
> today... for windows, which is now a minority OS.

I simply meant that connections between devices would sometimes fail
and I don't think anyone wanted to pick up the support costs.