RE: draft-pouffary-v6ops-ent-v6net-01

["Jeroen Massar" <jeroen@unfix.org>]

Tim Chown wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 11:22:35AM -0800, Jason Goldschmidt wrote:
> > 
> > This is not what IPv6 ONLY refers to.  A machine, such as a 
> linux or BSD 
> > box, that has only an IPv6 interface configured is not IPV6 
> ONLY, it is 
> > still dual stack.  Unless these implementations were 
> modified to remove 
> > the IPv4 stack, they are not IPV6 ONLY devices.
> 
> But for the sake of the scenarios, what is the difference?  I 
> think that
> most IP stacks are not dual implementation, but hybrid, so they are 
> not separate.
> 
> If the design team wishes to keep that interpretation of IPv6-only, I
> think it should change the text or define it with the other 
> definitions
> (DSN, etc), as "common" usage of the term is possibly different.

IMHO a "IPv6 Only" device is a device which only can do
network functions over IPv6. Thus a box which has a IPv4
and a IPv6 stack but doesn't use the IPv4 stack, or the IPv4
stack isn't usable due to no routing etc is a "IPv6 only" device.

As Tim also mentions most stacks are Hybrid, and actually most
OS's will depend internally, due to source code dependancies on
the IPv4 stack. Even some message passing techniques use different
parts of IP-alike stacks to pass system messages (ever blocked your
loopback :)

Greets,
 Jeroen