> Same issue with the routers in the path. IPv10 would require *all* of them to be upgraded for the new packet header format.
What will happen with one router from a specific company will happen with all routers from the same vendors, inserting updates is not that hard, but the case is will they work or not, and my idea works fine but the IETF needs to make up official decisions before the explosion of the Internet :-) the reason why is to get out from an I-D to another one and make a progress. Best, Khaled Omar -----Original Message----- From: Stephane Bortzmeyer [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 6:01 PM To: Bless, Roland (TM) Cc: Khaled Omar; [email protected] Subject: Re: [Int-area] Continuing IPv10 I-D discussion. On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 05:02:57PM +0200, Bless, Roland (TM) <[email protected]> wrote a message of 36 lines which said: > - IPv10 doesn't allow an IPv6-only host to communicate to an > IPv4-only host and vice versa as stated in the I-D. Hint: an > IPv4-only host has got no idea what an IPv6 address is, let alone > an "IPv10 address". Same issue with the routers in the path. IPv10 would require *all* of them to be upgraded for the new packet header format. > - As others already pointed out: Indeed, it has been said several times to the author but he keeps not listening. I wonder why there was a slot at the IETF meeting. _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
