http://www.etsi.org/technologies-clusters/technologies/next-generation-protocols I guess a rebuttal is still possible. Latif -----Original Message----- From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: 12 November 2016 21:04 To: Latif LADID [IPv6-based Internet] <latif@xxxxxxxx>; 'Randy Bush' <randy@xxxxxxx> Cc: 'Khaled Omar' <eng.khaled.omar@xxxxxxxxxxx>; ipv6@xxxxxxxx; ietf@xxxxxxxx Subject: Re: IPv10. Hi Latif, On 12/11/2016 20:17, Latif LADID [IPv6-based Internet] wrote: > Jon Postel will swizel in his grave if v10 is not assigned by IANA first. > Let's not confuse the market. A working group at ETSI has been formed > 6 months ago called NGP ( Next Gereation Protocols) lashing at v4 and > v6 to invent a new one. How incredibly foolish of them. Brian > Also the ITU will jump on this one to occupy the v10 space :-) > > Latif > > -----Original Message----- > From: ipv6 [mailto:ipv6-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Brian E > Carpenter > Sent: 12 November 2016 02:43 > To: Randy Bush <randy@xxxxxxx> > Cc: Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.omar@xxxxxxxxxxx>; ipv6@xxxxxxxx; > ietf@xxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: IPv10. > > On 12/11/2016 14:15, Randy Bush wrote: >>> Right now it seems that you have got a solution proposal for a >>> problem, that is IMHO not very clearly described. >> >> how about ipv4 and ipv6 are incompatible on the wire and this has >> created a multi-decade ipv6 charlie foxtrot? > > Yes, I suggest mentioning that to Vint, Bob and a few others in 1977, > so that they can design IPv4 with extensible addresses. People in > 2016 will be grateful. > > Brian > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > ipv6@xxxxxxxx > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > >