On 31 jul 2009, at 9:06, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:

Sounds like this would require a third datagram protocol number, that
is basically UDP except the checksum would only covering the IPv6 and
transport header. Hmmph, this is just like UDP-Lite really but it seems like there is opposition to overloading UDP-Lite. Then the 64- translators
would convert it to normal UDP/IPv4... ?

UDP ultra-lite: no length, no checksum, just port numbers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to