[ppml] IPv6>>32
Davis, Terry L
terry.l.davis at boeing.com
Tue May 10 12:52:28 EDT 2005
- Previous message: [ppml] IPv6>>32
- Next message: [ppml] IPv6>>32
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
David True enough but someday still I hope to see something come out of research that isn't a tunnel back or a brute force BGP solution. And probably within the next couple years we will see how well provider independent addressing works. Take care Terry -----Original Message----- From: David Conrad [mailto:david.conrad at nominum.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 9:19 AM To: Davis, Terry L Cc: Michael.Dillon at radianz.com; ppml at arin.net Subject: Re: [ppml] IPv6>>32 Terry, On May 10, 2005, at 8:31 AM, Davis, Terry L wrote: > V4 never considered the idea that entire networks would "undock" from > the Internet and then "move between continents" and attempt to "dock" > with the Internet again. While this might be true, it can be argued that given v6 uses the same routing technology as v4, v6 also doesn't consider the idea that networks can dock and undock. The same solution that is (at least theoretically) usable for IPv4 is what is being proposed for IPv6 -- provider independent addresses. Rgds, -drc
- Previous message: [ppml] IPv6>>32
- Next message: [ppml] IPv6>>32
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the PPML mailing list