ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Call for action vs. lost opportunity (Was: Re: Renumbering)

2007-10-04 13:16:02
Typo: should read IPv6 ~= IPv4+more_bits...

- Ralph

On Oct 4, 2007, at Oct 4, 2007,4:52 AM, Ralph Droms wrote:

Regarding transition:

On Sep 14, 2007, at Sep 14, 2007,3:43 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:


Unless I've missed something rather basic, in the case of IPv6, very little attention was paid to facilitating transition by maximizing interoperability
with the IPv4 installed base.
Dave, I have to agree with you in this regard. We may have achieved neither significant new capabilities because IPv6 ~= IPv6+more_bits, nor ease of
transition because transition wasn't thoroughly evaluated early on in
the design process...

- Ralph



_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf