Randy Bush <randy(_at_)psg(_dot_)com> writes:
There is a school of thought that seems to believe that IPv6 is a
failure because it only solves a quite narrow although extremely
important problem -- specifically address space exhaustion.
The fact that it does not solve the global routing table meltdown is,
according to such people, an obvious failure of v6 -- never mind that
they are unrelated issues.
addressing and routing are intimately related, inextricably intertwined,
etc. etc.
Of course. However, we only know one way to do addressing right now,
and it is the same paradigm in v4 and v6. People frequently propose
"endpoint identifiers" and "routing identifiers" be separated but no
one has ever come up with a worked proposal that was less flawed than
the current mechanism.
In any case, anyone who doesn't propose dumping v4 because the
addressing is "wrong" should have no trouble with the way that v6
addressing is done in general.
--
Perry E. Metzger perry(_at_)wasabisystems(_dot_)com
--
NetBSD Development, Support & CDs. http://www.wasabisystems.com/