Re: ocean: do not boil

[Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>]

> > It would strike me as extremely bizarre for the IAB to recommend
> > that P2P applications define their own addressing system and
> > routing protocols when IPv6 offers reasonably good ones.
> 
> Who said anything about a new address space or about routing?
> 
> Obviously we are talking about scenarios where the basic dual stack
> mechanism fails due to a connectivity gap. You then have two choices
> - resolve this by the sort of network level complexity Margaret's
>   message refers to.
> - resolve it at applications level. This may well involve an
>   applications level identifier namespace that works everywhere,
>   like URIs or RFC 2822, but it doesn't imply replacing the IP
>   locator namespace (a.k.a. addresses) or the IP routing system.

for the p2p app to work with an arbitrary mesh of v4/v6 connectivity 
it has to do its own routing using its own namespace.  whether you think
of this as replacing the IP routing system is up to you. but however
you think of it, it ends up fulfilling most of the same functions.