[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Open question and Critical dependencies

To: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>
Subject: Re: Open question and Critical dependencies
From: Brian E Carpenter <brc@zurich.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 08:34:53 +0200
Cc: shim6 <shim6@psg.com>
In-reply-to: <2005328161149.868230@BBPRIME>
Organization: IBM
References: <2005328161149.868230@BBPRIME>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113

Dave Crocker wrote:

Forgive me, but I do not see what it is about shim6 that cannot work equally well for IPv4.


IPv4 doesn't have a 64 bit routing prefix.
IPv4 doesn't have an interface identifier field.
IPv4 doesn't have a flow label field.
IPv4 doesn't have extension headers.
IPv4 doesn't have the same scaling goals as IPv6.
IPv4 does have widely deployed NAT already.

It just makes no sense to do this for IPv4.

   Brian

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Open question and Critical dependencies
  - From: Dave Crocker <dhc2@dcrocker.net>

References:
- RE: Open question and Critical dependencies
  - From: Dave Crocker <dhc2@dcrocker.net>

Prev by Date: Re: proposed text for charter
Next by Date: RE: Open question and Critical dependencies
Previous by thread: RE: Open question and Critical dependencies
Next by thread: Re: Open question and Critical dependencies
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread