----- Original Message ----- From: "Markku Savela" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > I say "toss the /64 boundary from the address architecture". Return it > back to original prefix=m, id=n bits format consistently. >
1. Do you really think that people are going to want to place their hardware-specific ids in the address fields ? 2. Have you considered the merits of placing "time-stamps" in the 128-bit DNS fields ? ....for the 4D Internet, where time becomes a dimension.... 3. Have you considered how the 128-bit DNS is used with other protocols, besides IPv6 ? 4. What has the ICANN Board and staff decided on this ?...isn't there an ASO ? 5. Have you seen a 2 dimensional object ?...such as a shadow....length and width and no depth... ...are you familiar with 3D ?....length, width, and depth ? 6. Have you read the book Flatland by Edwin Abbott ? http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=flatland 7. Have you spent much time learning about the Next Generation Internet ? ...3D and the governance structures...etc... http://www.ActiveWorlds.com http://www.OuterWorlds.com http://www.cyboria.com 8. Do you think people are stupid ?...and will jump off the I* society cliff when told to jump...? Jim Fleming 2002:[IPv4]:000X:03DB:...IPv8 is closer than you think... http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/unir.txt -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
