On fredag, apr 4, 2003, at 12:49 Europe/Stockholm, Bill Manning wrote:

   based on your concerns, listed
        above, IPv6 is going to be nothing more than IPv4 with larger address
        space.  if that is what we end up with, then IPv6 development might
        be considered a waste of time.

I don't think IPv6 will be (much) more than IPv4 with larger address space, BUT, that is not a small thing. It is something that would be really really nice to have. I am tired on writing ton of paper to my local ISP, which add tons of paper and send to their upstream provider which send something to RIPE NCC, which respond, and then 15 roundtrips later and two renumberings of the local network I might expand my /28 to a /27.


I am tired of this! I am tired on not being able to give real IP addresses to guests which visit me. I am tired on not being able to give real IP addresses to my IP phone. I am just so incredible tired.

So I want IPv6, even if it is *just* IPv4 with larger address space.

For really different Internet, I think we need something like:

- Real differentiation between routing identifier and globally unique
addressing identifier for a node (and not use one IP address for both)
- The ability to change the routing identifier during flight
- Routing protocol(s) which really is tuned to the fact that the
Internet is a mesh and not a hierarchy anymore
- ...and many more things...


As Harald wrote:

Note: By "Deprecate Site-Local", I mean "Do not require any application, host, router, protocol or IETF practice to have to make special consideration for the idea that an IPv6 unicast address outside of the link-local range can refer to two different hosts".

We need to, until we have better mechanisms overall, make sure we keep applications so they can deal with addressing, while the network take care of the routing.


Mixing will not work. Especially as we don't have real solutions to the real problems.

So, when I say I want Site Local deprecated I mean I want routing and addressing separated, and given that separation, we have to work on solving the real problems we have with Internet today.

paf

--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to