Re: Shim6, was: Re: filtering /48 is going to be necessary

[Ryan Malayter <malayter () gmail com>]

On Mar 12, 10:07 am, "Robert E. Seastrom" <r... () seastrom com> wrote:
> It didn't help that there was initially no implementation of shim6
> whatsoever.  That later turned into a single prototype implementation
> of shim6 for linux.  As much as I tried to keep an open mind about
> shim6, eventually it became clear that this was a Gedankenexperiment
> in protocol design.  Somewhere along the line I started publicly
> referring to it as "sham6".  I'm sure I'm not the only person who came
> to that conclusion.

I thought the IETF required two inter-operable implementations for
protocols. Or was that just for standards-track stuff?

Anyway, the effort involved in getting Shim6 implemented globally on
all devices would have been nearly as large as switching over all
applications from TCP to a protocol with a "proper" session layer,
like SCTP. I believe there are libraries that wrap SCTP and make it
look like TCP to legacy applications; wouldn't that have been a better
approach?