Re: [RRG] Moving forward...

[Christian Vogt <christian.vogt@nomadiclab.com>]

> There needs to be a very compelling reason to make the solutions
> different for v4 versus v6. We would be doing a disservice to the
> community to purposely make them different.
>
> In fact, let me make a stronger statement. If they are different, that
> could be another barrier to getting IPv6 deployed.


Dino,

sure, we shouldn't separate the solutions without a reason. What I was
saying is that we shouldn't limit ourselves to solutions that fit both
IPv4 and IPv6.  Again, given that the solution space is different for
IPv4 and IPv6, we might find that separate solutions are better.

Moreover, given that the solution space for IPv6 is larger than that
for IPv4 -- perhaps even a true super-set --, making use of this
larger solution space by designing separate IPv4/v6 solutions will
likely make the IPv6 solution better.  This would help IPv6 getting
deployed, not hinder it.

- Christian



--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.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