At 12:21 20/07/2005, Roger Jorgensen wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, JFC (Jefsey) Morfin wrote:
<snip>
>
> Up to now, what has been investigated is what IPv6 can bring to the
> network. I think another interesting approach is to start from a universal
> numbering space and investigate what IPv6 could bring to it (with the
> current technology or not) and to all its constituents. May be the way to
> understand how to deploy IPv6 faster instead of selling it slowly?
This is a completly different discussion and IPv6 is just one of many
tools available. Problem is, are no use in trying to create lots of funky
services if the communication wont work... and no one (almost) want to
use time and money on getting the communication to work without a service
using it.
I am not sure I understand your comment. I am talking of IPv6 support of
the universal numbering space, not of other tools. Problem IMHO is to
understand where regidity is useful and where it impeaches solutions people
would need to put your time and money into? I am always against exclusive
and exclusion, whatever their good reasons, when this is possible. All the
more in techniics and innovation. Just says that.
I see advantages in having /48 /56 /64 etc. thresholds in rates. Not really
in technics. But I certainly see the technical con/pros why to use these
threeshold, the same I see advantages in /128 and in InterfaceID Grids.
Or did I misread your comment?
Thank you.
jfc
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
