On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Khaled Omar <[email protected]> wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > From: Khaled Omar > Sent: Friday, September 29, 2017 7:32 PM > To: 'Tom Herbert' > Subject: RE: [Int-area] Request for a mailing list to IPmix I-D. > > Hi Tom. > >> Regarding this statement: "this can be accomplished by technology companies >> in a short time" -- I see no technical basis for this claim. > > The technical basis is to allow encapsulation of both versions in the same L3 > packet header. > >> Since the initial posting of the IPv10, I and and others have asked several >> times for an implementation. > > Yes, this have to be tested because theoritically it works fine and I'm not a > software developer to test it by myself. > The statement "theoritically it works fine" is another unqualified statement that won't convince anyone.
If there's no plan for running code then maybe this work, as well as a discussion about the long term plan for IP, belong in IRTF? Thanks, Tom > Khaled > > -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Herbert [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, September 29, 2017 7:21 PM > To: Khaled Omar > Cc: Suresh Krishnan; int-area > Subject: Re: [Int-area] Request for a mailing list to IPmix I-D. > > On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Khaled Omar <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Hi Suresh, >> >> >> >>> The part that is not clear is why you believe IPv10 will be any more >>> successful or quicker to widespread deployment than IPv6. Can you >>> share your thoughts? >> >> >> >> The deployment of IPv10 is a software development process, this can be >> accomplished by technology companies in a short time, there will be no >> dependence on enterprises’ users who didn’t migrate to IPv6 till now >> and this migration took so much time without full migration. >> > Khaled, > > Probably all hardware supports IPv6, continued IPv6 deployment is a software > problem or more aptly it is an infrastructure and management problem. > > Regarding this statement: "this can be accomplished by technology companies > in a short time" -- I see no technical basis for this claim. > Since the initial posting of the IPv10, I and and others have asked several > times for an implementation. Have you started on one? Without even a > prototype it's highly unlikely that technology companies, many of which of > representation on this list, are going to put any stock in your arguments > about how easy the protocol is to develop and deploy. > They're certainly aren't going to take resources off of IPv6 or more tangible > projects based on unqualified statements like this. > > Tom > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> From: Suresh Krishnan [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Friday, September 29, 2017 6:47 PM >> To: Khaled Omar >> Cc: int-area >> Subject: Re: Request for a mailing list to IPmix I-D. >> >> >> >> Hi Khaled, >> >> >> >> On Sep 29, 2017, at 12:31 PM, Khaled Omar >> <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi Suresh, >> >> >> >> The problem I’m trying to solve is to overcome the depletion of IPv4 >> address space and the lack of implementing IPv6 , this will cause the >> IPv6 only hosts not to be able to access the whole internet as there >> will be IPv6 only hosts (18% of the Internet traffic) against the >> domination of IPv4 only hosts (82% of the Internet traffic), >> >> >> >> The part that is not clear is why you believe IPv10 will be any more >> successful or quicker to widespread deployment than IPv6. Can you >> share your thoughts? >> >> >> >> >> >> IPmix allows IPv6 only hosts to communicate to IPv4 only hosts and >> vice versa, and this will allow the coexistence of both version >> without any separation or division on the Internet >> >> >> >> NAT64 (RFC6146) already allows "IPv6 only hosts to communicate to IPv4 >> only hosts and vice versa”. >> >> >> >> Regards >> >> Suresh >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Int-area mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area >> > _______________________________________________ > Int-area mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
