----- Original Message ----- From: "Margaret Wasserman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > >Do such implementations which have problems with 64KB packets need to be > >able to use tunneling? > > I'm not sure -- do you think that home gateways, cable modems, DSL > modems, etc. will need to use tunneling? >
You might find that the view on one-side of an IPv4-based DSL modem is different from the view on the other side. From the consumer side, the DSL modem gives them access to a large, IPv4, non-TOS, transport, which may or may not be useful in passing packets from one side of the Next Generation (NG) Internet, to the other. From inside that transport or cloud, the DSL modem appears as a source or sink for IPv4 packets, and the goal is to route what comes from that modem and route to that modem based on a limited number of bits in the 160-bit IPv4 header. Between the DSL modem and the consumer's network can grow equipment which is intelligent enough to process more of the 160-bits in the IPv4 header. At some point, the IPv4, non-TOS, transport can be removed, when less and less traffic flows across that core, and instead is routed around the edges via the layer of intelligence added between those DSL modems and the user's network. Tunneling may be a misnomer, isolation may be a better term. The existing, aging, 32-bit, IPv4, non-TOS, transport, will become more and more isolated and less used, as usage of more of the bits in the 160-bit IPv4 header allow for packets to be routed around that core, thus isolating it, and not tunneling thru it. All this is happening now, the code is expanding and becoming more widely used. http://www.netfilter.org/ With only 64-bits of the 160-bit IPv4 header used for addressing. There are plenty of bits available to be used to layer around the legacy transport. That may likely become the transport-of-last-resort for some devices, which will have direct (wireless) access to more modern transports. The Next Generation Internet may tunnel back thru the legacy Internet, but that would be good to avoid, because that is viewed as a black-hole, with no hope. Jim Fleming 2002:[IPv4]:000X:03DB http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/unir.txt -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
