Re: IPv6 woes - RFC

[Masataka Ohta <mohta () necom830 hpcl titech ac jp>]

Eliot Lear wrote:

> Operators and 
> router manufacturers at the time pushed TUBA, which was considerably 
> less compatible with the concepts used in v4 because of variable length 
> addressing.

That address length is variable is not a problem at all. Byte-wise
barrel shifters by hardware for CLNP are trivially easy and light
weight to implement.

The real problem is on the number of prefix bits which must be
looked up by backbone routers, which means IPv6 abandoning TLA
is hopeless.

NSAP addresses, which essentially are telephone numbers, assume
geographically aggregated addresses at country level (so called,
country code), which is why they don't need large global routing
tables.

8+8 has nothing to do with the problem and LISP came a lot later
as a broken solution for the problem.

                                                Masataka Ohta