Hello, yes, address translator and higher level gateways are tools to cope with the difficulties caused by the address shortage, but
it is difficult to scale these tools and we can rid of them with the large scale deployment of IPv6 based Internet. Less energy consumption, clearer architecture... I thought this is clear for all of us... Géza On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Pars Mutaf <pars.mu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 6:25 PM, Cameron Byrne <cb.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:03 AM, Pars Mutaf <pars.mu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Brian E Carpenter >> > <brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> Lixia, >> >> >> >> The original note says "I think it is possible to locate the node we >> >> need." >> >> >> >> So, the idea is apparently not to divide the Internet - it is simply to >> >> deal >> >> with the fact that addresses would be ambiguous. Since we have 15 years >> >> experience of the pain caused by ambiguous addresses, and a perfectly >> good >> >> 128 bit address space that avoids any need for ambiguous addresses, I >> >> don't >> >> see the point. It isn't even worth sending the code. >> >> >> >> Pars, >> >> >> >> Your original note also says "I am not here to discuss these details." >> >> Sorry, >> >> but in the IETF it's *exactly* the details that we must discuss; that's >> >> our >> >> job. We've been doing so since 1992 to my personal knowledge. >> >> >> > >> > I propose have a network of Internets: >> > >> > Internet1 >> > Internet2 >> > Internet3 >> > ... >> > Interntet_n >> > >> > In Internet 1 and 2 we may have two nodes with the same address. >> > The goal is to route the packet to the right Internet. I don't think it >> is >> > impossible. >> > >> >> Quite possible. Most people call it CGN. In fact, the IETF granted a >> /10 of IPv4 for this purpose. >> >> > You mean this one? > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6264 > > Figure 1 looks like what I am proposing. Right? > > If so, we can also have a IPv7 with is, in addition to IPv6 (or directly > IPv7). I have no idea what IPv7 > would be and why it would be needed, but it looks like we should be > flexible (to me at least). > > Pars > > CB >> >> > Pars >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> >> Regards >> >> Brian >> >> >> >> On 2012-04-10 15:09, Lixia Zhang wrote: >> >> > the Internet is a means to communicate. >> >> > and the market drives for most effective/efficient/economical >> >> > communication systems (there are tradeoffs between the adjectives) >> >> > wonder if you could help explain how your picture of "network of >> >> > Internets" would be more effective and economical (than what we have >> now) >> >> > >> >> > Lixia >> >> > >> >> > On Apr 10, 2012, at 6:24 AM, Pars Mutaf wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> >> >> In my opinion, we can add one more Internet when necessary, then >> >> >> another one etc. >> >> >> >> >> >> We can have as many Internets as we need, all different. >> >> >> >> >> >> We just need a *network of Internets*. >> >> >> >> >> >> The first (current) Internet is an IPv4 Internet. >> >> >> The second Internet can be an IPv4 Internet too. In this case we >> would >> >> >> have 2 IPv4 Internets. >> >> >> Obviously, in this case, we would have the same addresses used by >> two >> >> >> different nodes in >> >> >> the two Internets. I think it is possible to locate the node we >> need. I >> >> >> am not here to discuss >> >> >> these details. >> >> >> >> >> >> The second Internet can be an IPv6 Internet. >> >> >> >> >> >> The second Internet can be a IPv7 Internet. >> >> >> >> >> >> The second Internet can be IPv6 but we may have a third one which is >> >> >> IPv7 etc. >> >> >> >> >> >> We just need a network of Internets, all possibly different. >> >> >> >> >> >> Pars >> >> >> http://content-based-science.org/ >> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list >> >> >> ipv6@ietf.org >> >> >> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 >> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> > >> >> > -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list >> >> > ipv6@ietf.org >> >> > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 >> >> > -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > >> > >> > >> > -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list >> > ipv6@ietf.org >> > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 >> > -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > >> > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > ipv6@ietf.org > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > >
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
