Re: V6 still not supported

["John Levine" <johnl () iecc com>]

It appears that Matt Hoppes <mattlists () rivervalleyinternet net> said:
> Just like with IPv6, there would be a transition period, but during that 
> time software updates would very easily bring equipment up to spec much 
> faster and quicker.
>
> Eventually, 192.168.0.1 would be represented (for example) as 
> 0.0.0.0.192.168.0.1 (or something similar - I haven't really sketched 
> out the logistics on paper).

Sounds just like an IPv4-mapped IPv6 address, which is ::ffff:192.168.0.1.
See RFC 1884, written in 1995, and the other RFCs which update it but don't
change this particular aspect.

What's the difference?

R's,
John