From: "Joel M. Halpern" <[email protected]>
And v6 is still in sufficient flux that changes are far more
practical.
I just about fell off my chair when I read that.
Well, actually, I can say the same for IPv4. ;-)
Dino
Some years back there was a suggestion to change TCPv6 so that the
pseudo-header (and checksum) only included the "ID" part of the IPv6
address,
and it was shot down, because 'it would cause imcompatability with the
installed base', or words to that effect.
So I'm not at all sure that the car's hood is as open as you seem to
think it
might be.
Noel
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
