Re: And Now for Something Completely Different (was Re: IPv6 news)

[Tony Li <tony.li () tony li>]

Daniel,

> But wasn't that the rationale for originally putting the kitchen  
> sink into IPv6, rather than fixing the address length issue?


The stated rationale was to fix the address length issue.


> I think we missed a lot of opportunities.


Amen.


> We're 10 years on, and talking about whether there will need to be  
> more than one massive pain of migration, because the kitchen sink  
> didn't take into account multihoming.


More generally because we were unwilling to make changes to the  
routing architecture.


> Now we're talking about a solution that appear to be an even worse  
> Rube Goldberg than token ring source-route bridging.


No one has proposed anything that is as bad as the exponential  
traffic explosion caused by explorers.


> Moore will likely have to continue to produce the solution.


What happens if he can't?  Silicon technology *is* topping out.  What  
happens to v6 if every single household and business on the planet  
decides to multihome?

Tony