IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: New Approach For Discussing IPng

Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com> Mon, 19 April 2021 14:10 UTC

Return-Path: <christopher.morrow@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB4C13A3456 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 07:10:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.196
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.196 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rVqEiTxM3unQ for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 07:10:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk1-x72b.google.com (mail-qk1-x72b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 149123A32C1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 07:09:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk1-x72b.google.com with SMTP id x11so35779334qkp.11 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 07:09:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=5vwtb6OEEPOOD+U1waSj0jLdBTzgo6xaRStlFnVNyEQ=; b=QIhqx6/YEWPPPfVynrNeR9JaZjxwSEGYnPu+L0UCwyZTejbQ6v9arfuRIX0sNx6Ef/ 8E4P5Mmfr0tdUSawNGm7tUNnoSi5v0l3u25Z3uz/G3Gm0NZOohn9b2KXbwa3RbrvjPlM qXbpMxS1nTs6qOgMkgE4HgTxfkpMAKFmKq2LnHfbAWkjYD/yOhihr5YKWATqYWrlGnR+ OaVJiCojGYdA/gvFqSgwb3TwF/uZ3xMG8APTx/k4Ggirfna8KmPtgn7uZwId4c7IX+GE /RqgsfyYH/9cC+lfQ9xSFk+GemuoBHCThPdj0IlqxCy99nsWmBBXE0N9CkH73tFyzSRr SP/Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=5vwtb6OEEPOOD+U1waSj0jLdBTzgo6xaRStlFnVNyEQ=; b=tCkA8OIIg7BiUP17dd+xonB45CU29wPhvjnOGMsd5G+AuNNwGituRCII4I7C7CHSWN F6Ko53YjGMWRCYeur4SCK0oHOOExogMMh8bPDCEqiOQZLMXAZWhMCP1Lzh3MVpTJSh9A Wl0g/qbdl+iCpfTgKm6V7peswzaD+c8tFCCvYlfMpfoqVOaEHIsrf9tqWt04E82gjwhH O+1JnATDZI5FzeBS1Qrp+FPC28vZNzhrowf0QT/FkxumO7uNCYNY/PrrU2JHd2/Npck/ qsC1scOAAq0SFf3u91kqXwKubnqkMWepi4XQ4bHRpOPypfVLszRQb79FNoVMKK7ydVxB zn2w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531pKe9pT9lfBpVmgdW7LRtmU0Gru+E8ZxIzBhR19brITySVCC0q /j92DoQ6gOKikvQ6HNs0ZtVYDJ5+vcc0sJc6KiI=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxZWVvggaXIG2MQdWFMPFmO8D+viKrw0Ae5/lH7sFgrpjyQcDxogWF1MqKw+lujWswncAfxU/ATIV+CBFHGKFo=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:1302:: with SMTP id o2mr12434794qkj.45.1618841366874; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 07:09:26 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAMm+LwhV01N_uuFV8TfiyegpqDLmUYwxBcmkUAGG-HfJ7vSB+Q@mail.gmail.com> <989A5048-5EA8-479B-9231-D61B646E46F5@strayalpha.com> <CAMm+Lwhy0c6G7YLx8n7Ya7psG6VxcEckk-ncKg750rscuz-Yaw@mail.gmail.com> <89f2c243-433c-fa32-7dbf-c6392fde3da6@gmail.com> <AM7PR03MB6594B91C2C731546BC059D1CAE499@AM7PR03MB6594.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CAL9Qcx7E8fx4fEsnbxogXpAeut9h_ZzknCfu_hLRrUQWqEXcAQ@mail.gmail.com> <AM7PR03MB65949F4A2FBDE298734450DBAE499@AM7PR03MB6594.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <AM7PR03MB65949F4A2FBDE298734450DBAE499@AM7PR03MB6594.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2021 10:09:15 -0400
Message-ID: <CAL9jLaa+8TFN4qMuUABSkmiWfoDtwDzJUJz=+_fFb5Rj2a8a4Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: New Approach For Discussing IPng
To: Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.omar@outlook.com>
Cc: Tom Beecher <beecher@beecher.cc>, Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>, IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>, Lloyd W <lloyd.wood@yahoo.co.uk>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000009ed02c05c053e05d"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/D9Ji8iF9YETaY3DkSd0L33cq2SA>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2021 14:10:38 -0000

On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 9:53 AM Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.omar@outlook.com>
wrote:

> Hi Tom,
>
>
>
> >> That would be an accurate description of tunnel mode IPSEC. If that is
> what you are proposing, numerous v4/v6 tunneling standards are already
> defined and are well developed.
>
>
>
> I’m not asking for an IPSec tunnel, I’m proposing something like that
> tunnel when it adds another header with different source and destination
> addresses.
>
>
>

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2890


> Once that will be accomplished, then peacefully IPv4 and IPv6 can coexist
> and communicate.
>
>
>

all done.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email