Thierry Ernst wrote:
Templin, Fred L wrote:
The only scenario that makes sense to me to use 240/4 as
non-reserved
address space is if it's use can help move us to IPv6
(e.g., Plan A).
By that logic, shouldn't we stop all IPv4-related work?
Yes.
That was a good question to ask indeed ;-)
A different topic than this thread , but a good one to ask, so I
changed the subject line.
I understand the need to fix IPv4 when there is a need to fix a bug or
an existing feature in a deployed protocol, but I don't understand why
the IETF is not cutting new proposed work items that intend to provide
new features to IPv4.
This uses important IETF CPU cycles and energy that we cannot afford
to
pay as a community. One cannot fight two wars at once, and the one we
need to win right now is "IPv6 deployment".
I think that depends on what you mean by "IPv6 deployment".
IMHO, IPv6 deployment as endpoint identifiers is a MUST but
disruption of the IPv4 Internet is a SHOULD NOT.
Agreed that IPv4 must not be disrupted.
What I meant to say is really all the work items for providing new
features to IPv4. Example in the IPv4 mobility area.
I think you meant MIP4 WG.
I wanted to say that while I'm happy to see more and more IPv6 addresses
allocated and - right this evening - my home being invaded by 2^64
addresses by my provider, I also think many if not all new paradigm
applications aren't IPv6 but IPv4: facebook, itunes, gps, skype, fon,
second life, you name it.
In this respect I think IPv4 Internet is becoming more and more pervasive.
I have yet to see a new widespread application (run on small numerous
devices, embedded in the physical nature - "sand") that runs IPv6 and
not IPv4.
That said, I'm happy to work on both IPv4 and IPv6 extensions, at IETF.
Alex
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
