The IPv4 unicast extensions project - Making class-e (240/4), 0/8, 127/8, 225/8-232/8 generally usable - adding 419 million new IPs to the world, and fixing various other slightly broken pieces of the IPv4 world
Your idea was already discussed in some forums when the IANA ran out of addresses. It will not work:
Today, server operators and internet access providers simply ignore RFC 6540 because changes in their hard- and software would be necessary. This means: They don't support IPv6 although it is mandatory according to the RFCs.
However, changes of hard- and software would also be required if the ranges proposed by you should become global addresses: Server operators and internet access providers would ignore the corresponding RFC the same way as they ignore RFC 6540 - for the same reasons!
It would not be possible to establish a connection between computer with an address in the new range (e.g. 127.3.4.5) and most other computers in the internet.
This is exactly the reason why you cannot just use an IPv6 address instead of an IPv4 address today!
People demanding an IPv4 address today will not be able to use an address in the "new" ranges.
Second:
I doubt that all programs using multicasting use the correct addresses. I suspect that many of them just use a random address in the range 224/4. I have to admit to have written such a program myself.
If parts of this range become global addresses and somebody starts a(n old) program that uses multicasting, the multicast messages will not be transmitted as multicast but as unicast to the corresponding IPv4 address.
If the corresponding program is used by many people, the node having that address will be "spammed" with data packets that are actually intended to be multicast packets in the LAN.
First:
Your idea was already discussed in some forums when the IANA ran out of addresses. It will not work:
Today, server operators and internet access providers simply ignore RFC 6540 because changes in their hard- and software would be necessary. This means: They don't support IPv6 although it is mandatory according to the RFCs.
However, changes of hard- and software would also be required if the ranges proposed by you should become global addresses: Server operators and internet access providers would ignore the corresponding RFC the same way as they ignore RFC 6540 - for the same reasons!
It would not be possible to establish a connection between computer with an address in the new range (e.g. 127.3.4.5) and most other computers in the internet.
This is exactly the reason why you cannot just use an IPv6 address instead of an IPv4 address today!
People demanding an IPv4 address today will not be able to use an address in the "new" ranges.
Second:
I doubt that all programs using multicasting use the correct addresses. I suspect that many of them just use a random address in the range 224/4. I have to admit to have written such a program myself.
If parts of this range become global addresses and somebody starts a(n old) program that uses multicasting, the multicast messages will not be transmitted as multicast but as unicast to the corresponding IPv4 address.
If the corresponding program is used by many people, the node having that address will be "spammed" with data packets that are actually intended to be multicast packets in the LAN.