Re: IPv10 is the solution.

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

To: Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.omar@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "ietf@xxxxxxxx" <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: IPv10 is the solution.
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2022 21:50:09 +0900
In-reply-to: <AM7PR03MB6594308AF1D71774E4771A84AE269@AM7PR03MB6594.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <AM7PR03MB6594F8D241FD6D663B1CAF39AE269@AM7PR03MB6594.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com> <f04fc618-5c70-d851-42e4-4a2601dd9d16@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <AM7PR03MB6594308AF1D71774E4771A84AE269@AM7PR03MB6594.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.0

Khaled Omar wrote:

I can't see any point to deploy something else with

address length as long as that of IPv6.

Please read the IPv10 draft again.


That it support address range as large as that of IPv6
makes it operationally hopeless, just as IPv6 is
operationally hopeless, regardless of protocol details
on how the so lengthy addresses are specified.

					Masataka Ohta

Follow-Ups:
- Re: IPv10 is the solution.
  - From: Khaled Omar

References:
- IPv10 is the solution.
  - From: Khaled Omar
- Re: IPv10 is the solution.
  - From: Masataka Ohta
- Re: IPv10 is the solution.
  - From: Khaled Omar

Prev by Date: Re: IPv10 is the solution.
Next by Date: Re: IPv10 is the solution.
Previous by thread: Re: IPv10 is the solution.
Next by thread: Re: IPv10 is the solution.
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

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

Powered by Linux