Brian,
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.
I wasn't asking for a detailing of differences between 4 and 6.
I was/am asking what it was about the shim work that requires taking advantage
of features specific to 6.
Does/will shim6 do something special with the 64-bit routing prefix? If so,
what?
Does/will shim6 use the interface identifier field? If so, how and why?
Does/will shim6 rely on the flow label field? Why?
Does/will shim6 use extension headers? Why?
IPv4 doesn't have the same scaling goals as IPv6.
so? what are the technical characteristics of the shim work that distinguish
between these differences in goal?
IPv4 does have widely deployed NAT already.
Predicting that the end-user population is going to stop using something it
has come to rely on is just a tad dangerous.
The fact that nat's are deployed for a variety of reasons keeps getting
ignored.
d/
---
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
+1.408.246.8253
dcrocker a t ...
WE'VE MOVED to: www.bbiw.net