[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RRG] Moving forward...
On 6/19/08 9:43 AM, Lixia Zhang allegedly wrote:
- IPv4/v6 share the same architecture; the only major fundamental
difference is their address space size.
- my notion of the RRG task is to develop an architectural
solution to routing scalability.
- We should step up a level from looking specific versions of
IP at this stage of solution development. Our solution has to be
an architectural change, and should work for either version.
On 6/19/08 1:03 PM, Tony Li allegedly wrote:
If we do find something that is both clean AND can be back-ported to v4, I
would definitely support that.
"Clean" as in: in accord with the design goals draft.
But Lixia is right. At this point it shouldn't matter whether something
can be put in a hop-by-hop header or not. We don't need to be down at
that level. So v4 vs v6 shouldn't be an issue yet.
to unsubscribe send a message to email@example.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg