|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: IPv6
On Fri, Jun 13, 2003 at 03:37:01AM +0000, E.B. Dreger wrote: > > SS> Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 19:22:38 -0500 > SS> From: Stephen Sprunk > > > SS> When a 30Mpps IPv4 box falls back to <200kpps for IPv6, I > SS> don't think "not completely functional" is an adequate > SS> description. To me, that falls into the "not supported" > SS> category. > > Okay, I'll make a fool of myself on-list -- certainly not the > first time. ;-) > > Why not use the highest-order 32 bits of an IPv6 address for > interdomain routing... i.e., "overlay" them on IPv4 addresses > and/or a 32-bit ASN? Yes, it smells of classful routing. Call > me shortsighted, but how many billion interdomain routing > policies do we really need? > > Probably OT, but seems semi-fitting for the thread. The whole 64 bits reserved for a link layer address thing seems silly, why don't we just put some payload in there and make the packets a fixed size... :) -- Richard A Steenbergen <[email protected]> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC)
|