Re: Backwards compatability with existing IPv6 [was: Re: Network layerreqt? [was Re: Transport level multihoming]]

[Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>]

Thomas;

> > Considering that there virtualy is NO install base of IPv6, we
> > can assume anything.
> 
> This is a point we'll discuss for a long time I'm sure, but I believe
> it is impractical to assume there is no installed base and thus we are
> free to do anything. The reality is that there are IPv6 products (for
> end hosts) in the pipeline (Sun Solaris-8, Windows XP, AIX, etc.)
> Getting *any* changes into end hosts will not happen until a minimum
> of 2-3 years from today (i.e., any changes need to be made into RFCs,
> and we don't have any proposals yet) and then would need to line up
> with individual vendor product plans. Note that I am not necessarily
> talking about *deployment*; I'm talking about products that include
> IPv6 support. When the time comes that people turn them on, they will
> simply turn on the version they already have. Thus, the boxes that
> ship in the next few years will have an impact.

Minimum of 2-3 years?

That is a familiar argument heard for these five years.

Five years with no install base! OK?

> Compatability issues with existing implementations will be one of the
> factors that will need to be weighed.

There is no existing implementations worth considering.

That we need some change to make IPv6 worth deploying means we should
change it as soon as possible.

							Masataka Ohta