Re: A simple question

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



>   | wrong.  we know now that 1918 addresses created a big mess.
> 
> No, we don't know that, because that's incorrect.   1918 addresses
> are just numbers, they can't have created the mess.   The mess was created
> by the demands of the users that led to the creation of the 1918 addresses.
> That is, the mess would still have been there, but worse, had 1918 never
> existed.

not clear.  as someone pointed out, the intended use case for 1918 has all but
disappeared, so maybe we wouldn't have had such a mess afterall. 

of course we would have had to have some kind of scoped addresses by now
anyway due to the address shortage in v4.  that doesn't justify putting them
in v6.

>   | and nothing about IPv6 use of SLs reduces that mess.
> 
> I think it does, but even if you're right, the mess is there anyway.
> It isn't going away, whatever you do with SLs.
> 
> This is just like not liking shit, so you're going to ban the sewer system.

well, the damage caused by SLs spreads to every aspect of the network from
apps on down.  so having SLs in v6 is like saying that since we are going to
have shit no matter what we do, we might as well spread it everywhere rather
than try to promote any kind of sanitation.

Keith


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]