On 04 Jan 2012, at 07:17 , Philip Homburg wrote: > RFC-2460 is from 1998. You are talking about the IPv6 network > before 1998? And that resembles todays IPv6 internet in what way?
The network layer is largely the same. Routing is largely the same, except that table sizes always seem to increase. Certainly transport protocols are largely the same. We now have SCTP, although it seems not yet widely deployed. I very much hope DNSsec will become much more widely deployed. I have spent a fair amount of energy over the past ~15 years helping to ensure that [other folks'] DNSsec-related R&D would be funded. The bulk of the Internet continues to use IPv4 today, and probably will for the next decade. The IPv4 specifications and widely deployed IPv4 implementations both support a 576 byte Link MTU. So DNSsec will need to work over 576 byte links just to be deployable in the bulk of the deployed Internet. That might be awkward, or sub-optimal, but it is not a recent development. > When I set the link MTU of my WAN link to 576, > VoIP stops working (over IPv4). Curious. I know of several deployments of VoIP over small MTU links. They work fine using standard off-the-shelf IETF protocols for VoIP (e.g. SIP, RTP). So it isn't a protocol problem. > They have had since 1998 to find a fix for the > 1280 mimimum MTU problem. It is not my problem. The Link MTU minimum size is the IETF's problem, because the IETF is trying to support the whole globe's networking needs. IPv4 does so today. It would be sad if IPv6 could not do so. Cheers, Ran -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
