On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 05:29:39PM -0700, Tony Hain wrote:
> David Conrad wrote:
> > ....
> > IPv6 _is_ IPv4 with more bits and it is being deployed that way.
>
> No it is not, and you need to stop claiming that because it confuses people
> into limiting their thinking to the legacy IPv4 deployment model.
>
... {elided}
>
> If there is research to do towards this, it will be in the arena of social
> engineering. Once it is clear how to stop operators from deciding the most
> expedient thing to do is embed the current IP address into some
> configuration, then engineering can build the tool to enforce that. It is
> very difficult to get people to realize that the accumulation of short term
> cost savings will turn on them as a sizable cost when changes become
> necessary.
>
> Tony
beating this dead horse...
actually, David is profoundly wrong. IPv6 is an entirely
new address family - it has erie similarities to IPv4, but
is not backward compatable.
--bill
Opinions expressed may not even be mine by the time you read them, and
certainly don't reflect those of any other entity (legal or otherwise).
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf