Hi Stewart,

Backwards compatible should be always good thing for investment protection. 
Except “could put your new packet into a IPv6 parser”, another possible 
approach is the last new forwarder translate new packet to IPv6 packet (may 
encapsulate new fields in extension header), and passthrough in IPv6 domain. 
Then the first new forwarder adjacent to IPv6 forwarder must recognize IPv6 
encapsulation and traversing all extension headers to form new packets if next 
hop is new forwarder.

Guangpeng Li

From: Stewart Bryant [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 2, 2021 9:53 PM
To: Toerless Eckert <[email protected]>
Cc: Stewart Bryant <[email protected]>; Jiayihao <[email protected]>; 
[email protected]; int-area 
<[email protected]>; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Using ISO8473 as a network layer to carry flexible 
addresses




On 1 Mar 2021, at 15:33, Toerless Eckert 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

I really don't understand why the IPv6 world has not understood how the most 
easy way
to allow for the applicability of IPv6 to grow (especially beyond "just more 
addresses thn IPv4")
would be to come up with a backward compatible encap on the wire that would 
support additional
address lengths.

Toerless

I don’t think there is a simple backwards compatible approach, but we can 
probably do more than we do today.

Backwards compatible means that you could put your new packet into a IPv6 
parser and it would correctly forward the packet as if nothing had changed.

You could I suppose put a well known IPv6 address in the IPv6 header and put 
the real address in an extension header, perhaps including the pointer to the 
address in the suffix of the IPv6 address to make finding the EH much faster, 
but I am not sure that is backwards compatible.

I suppose it might be able to do a bit better if the address in the IPv6 DA was 
the DA of the egress router and old routers did best effort to the egress and 
newer routers knew to take a look at the extension header for more detail.

I think that it is worth thinking about how we could do better than we do 
today, but I think we need to be careful with the term backwards compatible.

- Stewart




_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area

Reply via email to