A single common internetworking layer helps reach other nodes regardless of
their underlying technology.

Current situation shows that, now we need to reach other nodes regardless
of their underlying technology, and regardless of their IP version. This is
what Discrete IP does.

Not allowing different IP versions is a technology blocker. IPv6 is ready,
some entities need it, but they cannot use it fully.
This is because it is required that other entities also transition to IPv6.
They do not have to because they do not see the economical incentive. We
clearly have a paradox here. Some entities need IPv6, others do not. It is
also assumed that IP research is done. Someone may invent a totally new and
wonderful concept of IP and call it IPv7. Some entities may use it, while
others still use IPv6 and IPv4.

Discrete IP solves this paradox: Everybody do what they wish. It is
possible that all entities agree on the same IP version. But we cannot make
this decision for them. Discrete IP allows Continuous IP too.

Technology is free.

Pars


On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 12:34 AM, Joe Touch <[email protected]> wrote:

> You might want to look at Vintage Cerf's Catenet paper (which this
> reinvents - , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catenet), and consider the
> whole point of a single common internerworking layer (of which the Internet
> is an example).
>
> Joe
>
> On Sep 10, 2012, at 6:07 PM, Pars Mutaf <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
> I believe that the next step in IP's evolution would not be IPv6. It would
> be "Discrete IP" allowing any IP version.
> I concluded that Discrete IP better respects the end-to-end principles
> therefore it is economically more viable.
>
> Please read the full document here:
>
> http://www.scribd.com/doc/105448105/Discrete-IP
>
> Cheers,
>
> Pars
>
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
>
>
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area

Reply via email to