Re: How to force rapid ipv6 adoption

["Fred Baker (fred)" <fred () cisco com>]

> On Oct 2, 2015, at 2:18 PM, William Herrin <bill () herrin us> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Fred Baker (fred) <fred () cisco com> wrote:
> > There's no way to change the IPv4 address to be larger
>
> http://bill.herrin.us/network/ipxl.html
>
> There's always a way.
>
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin

We could discuss IPv8 and IPv16...

The question I would ask about your model is how one determines whether one is looking at a 32 or 64 bit destination 
address. Does one, for example, have to parse the options field before making that determination? How does that work in 
a router that drops an IPv4 header that is not 20 bytes in length?

There were a number of options kicked around that, in one way or another, reused packet fields (what is we assume that 
fragmentation doesn't ever happen?) or inserted options. Right, wrong, or indifferent, it wasn't that it wasn't 
considered, it was that it wasn't chosen.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail