Re: ipv4 and ipv6 Coexistence.

tom petch <daedulus@btconnect.com> Wed, 26 February 2020 09:56 UTC

Return-Path: <daedulus@btconnect.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 0C21E3A11E6 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 01:56:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=btconnect.onmicrosoft.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 c1Mj82ROqUL7 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 01:56:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from EUR02-VE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr20126.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.2.126]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3799E3A11E4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 01:56:53 -0800 (PST)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=MoRG49M99m/QMssTgA3PzWlKOm77K47+qPPixQvjS0g+B3pYLUJbefo0QqYF/SMgA2tpaPnBuwKOWdsPEVxpMLUJ1wsloGBFLKxtPRELAuhQTQJdzSyL3rSY4i4+0HDWubWhg+JueS9ZSO7z6AGbkjV4STGla2AiB9Mm/z1UMpIWnPNGRmStGuG7R6obc4JNsELSEciL4LqMuaAD/1fgXuFCj/OMN0nnB/ce+NJkgUeAwvlhuNKHMV2iUbQRKiiU44Mnqi2BXHWpuoeuYYezJelXjDemkvj6m1tZhPTJPnjcNJ8aDmwnyBdHtK39qzvvJrBX0a4QoVc7ILEdMftoCw==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=zgF663AFQembOR9GD/6gaRG/x1CxXOHPA48hsLLmd5Y=; b=NOENg6e2MEnTfCRM22baYuogCAogIsbYveKRV8YGRPZR0jYNzFRTCDYi8QtyNngHnZqRsL8QQQQE1qomhmzUBxHNPvgX6/dH36OfQPqiOOn+cHXUCBOlJxoKHgSBtRpMlSuh9gmwwej0gusPFW1qokaUCNligg+ftbOwx64uSkiNsEy3c02C1kBX5PkvffEc3AfHyjBBRU+AXql0k4Hr1YMcd1s1UDNi5ucm8yM24U0jMt4nx/9SxKr5CXq3dXDWPn94qRllJSP9cMof3oMCGSZpQ2lyQGINhitQPQWjMuL6vO+tqQA0u/YE9lD+0HKzR1j6oOpiHXem26dFw5ElkQ==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=btconnect.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=btconnect.com; dkim=pass header.d=btconnect.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=btconnect.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-btconnect-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=zgF663AFQembOR9GD/6gaRG/x1CxXOHPA48hsLLmd5Y=; b=PT+WgDRjWiqhS+JwDzNsKznH8d1r59BDP+S3V/2MZA/ZYkNyN7mqZD+zIEIPnbaNVeM/t5DwOB7pbTsZzuT7V5OKOoOsKtTwfShRqkqx7+B+0LT9cuGWuEgWzIagV9YMN56IQ8LEi71vpJlIdApPx670UlWkGxkzvAEYDI9rTAY=
Authentication-Results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=daedulus@btconnect.com;
Received: from VI1PR07MB3502.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (10.170.237.22) by VI1PR07MB5373.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (20.178.14.144) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2772.11; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 09:56:51 +0000
Received: from VI1PR07MB3502.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::f888:6f80:7ae9:71ce]) by VI1PR07MB3502.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::f888:6f80:7ae9:71ce%5]) with mapi id 15.20.2772.012; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 09:56:51 +0000
Subject: Re: ipv4 and ipv6 Coexistence.
To: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
References: <PR3P194MB0843ACAE01F33CEC57266A1AAE100@PR3P194MB0843.EURP194.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <EDAE6375-EE0B-4864-9834-C1FBC209D581@sobco.com> <PR3P194MB08431E138262F2A43C1D0621AE100@PR3P194MB0843.EURP194.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <8ADEA0E1-291A-4400-9925-F65A26116372@consulintel.es> <PR3P194MB0843939F3B38426960A66E70AE130@PR3P194MB0843.EURP194.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <D8063303-7DDA-41F8-A63A-C0244E3E9E25@isc.org> <AB27A3D9EB2EA6D6C3A31351@PSB> <BBCA5D24-2DFA-4DE8-A474-8CBA06BF152E@gmail.com>
Cc: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet=40consulintel.es@dmarc.ietf.org>, IETF Rinse Repeat <ietf@ietf.org>
From: tom petch <daedulus@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <5E5640DC.50109@btconnect.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 09:56:44 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0
In-Reply-To: <BBCA5D24-2DFA-4DE8-A474-8CBA06BF152E@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-ClientProxiedBy: CWLP123CA0118.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:401:5f::34) To VI1PR07MB3502.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:802:1a::22)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType: 1
Received: from [192.168.1.65] (81.131.229.19) by CWLP123CA0118.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:401:5f::34) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.20.2750.18 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 09:56:50 +0000
X-Originating-IP: [81.131.229.19]
X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email
X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 896a4db1-8d75-4a04-c296-08d7baa2335a
X-MS-TrafficTypeDiagnostic: VI1PR07MB5373:
X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: <VI1PR07MB5373118E8DF09A96ADDB45B8C6EA0@VI1PR07MB5373.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
X-MS-Oob-TLC-OOBClassifiers: OLM:8882;
X-Forefront-PRVS: 0325F6C77B
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(396003)(366004)(136003)(39860400002)(376002)(346002)(199004)(189003)(16526019)(2906002)(186003)(316002)(956004)(2616005)(6486002)(26005)(6666004)(478600001)(4326008)(54906003)(16576012)(66556008)(66476007)(110136005)(66946007)(52116002)(66574012)(5660300002)(8676002)(8936002)(36756003)(81166006)(81156014)(33656002)(53546011)(86362001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:VI1PR07MB5373; H:VI1PR07MB3502.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:0; MX:1;
Received-SPF: None (protection.outlook.com: btconnect.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck: 1
X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0;
X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: cyi8zE8W2+J7iikVGV9N9sXsbaANKJNIG9vGIfbYNdogiuo69tOutfeRevm0z2cujumTRVBLYvRB5v/OcyCG0/iuZ/bR52sDx+c7h8zwtDUWMFICXKSo2iUqlxBfJ21s8KOWwRQTPYZpYVXLJEuhQHNpB8uXvAiBLlujnd0PWBOxqX1xWcy7uQn8mrVt97jn80bDxo8OS1L9M0hmIVdzkDL0q+tzGSn08rFfYOa/2tY7iz+LHP78Nh5a6jNMitza7aa10CtzhjKzxwAPiRfKSQ7j3dfL/yI2sB/Rj5iM8alp2igjU6w9V5Mjz5EZtp3hCkik8gE7obfdTqRb3iO3hcyUB/pHzswUkxhsDcWQ8P3XDjpnZvrw4xIcUGpy1uOYVcVqk+6LJ6DReFaaYtILwhei6n8nDl/tXqF4pRWiDDyi2ySqGAboG+jFGFZwg0Vt
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData: toi5CwZH0oRwUnMD6dNlAE99ddTI7VPuv5kyshhRZe8qlxJfLThXnRa7o4moA1sm69cnpx+UMGdmzLxLcquIOEDo9SI/NX7BdCI324LDTw0BMcLMiwHL0bzXqdoq1cGjPnVb4yhDHTa5t57Zumkaxw==
X-OriginatorOrg: btconnect.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 896a4db1-8d75-4a04-c296-08d7baa2335a
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Feb 2020 09:56:50.9196 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: cf8853ed-96e5-465b-9185-806bfe185e30
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-MailboxType: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-UserPrincipalName: /pmkL62VZjYFSLBjAHb3m8bxu9joTe2autC62L3G65I3pSQ0xi+OhdHCb38acGhXytIw3NLkdu9uDz6Q+T64rg==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: VI1PR07MB5373
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/Mfi1cGFF8yLcCwK5we0jaV9hcvc>
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: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 09:56:56 -0000

On 26/02/2020 09:35, Stewart Bryant wrote:
>
>
>> On 20 Feb 2020, at 02:18, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> wrote:
>>
>>> We do need Governments to ban the selling of new IPv4-only
>>> domestic devices (CPE routers, TV's, game boxes, etc.).
>>
>> We have been there and seen that or variations on it tried.  In
>> some alternate reality, the last attempts were so successful
>> that TCP/IP and all other competing solutions died out, leaving
>> the world running entirely on an updated version of the OSI
>> stack (either connectionless or connection mode) today.  In the
>> reality in which we (or most of us) actually live, government
>> attempts to advance networking by requiring some technologies
>> and banning others mostly lead to technological paralysis and
>> increased costs for all concerned.
>
> Although ISO 8473 would have been a better platform than the IPv6 as we eventually settled on.
>
> - It could support multiple address types, of variable length, which SR is teaching us that we need.
> - It had a better checksum than that available in the transport layer, and would have meant that we could have avoided compulsory UDP c/s
> - The protocol suite supported connection oriented which MPLS taught us that we needed.
>
> Before my time, but was IPv4 designed before or after the Internet was released from the government to the public?

Way before, if I understand your question aright.

I see the start of the public internet as April, 1995, when commercial 
activity, over and above applying for NSF grants, was permitted.  This 
enabled ISPs as we now know them.

IPv4?  I date to RFC791, September 1981 although much of the technology 
was fixed before then.

Tom Petch



>
> Much of the success of the mobile phone industry arrises through standardisation, and if you read Stephen Temple’s book you understand the influence that the regulator (using spectrum availability as a leaver) had on forcing harmonisation.
>
> So maybe governments do not always get it wrong.
>
> - Stewart
>
>
>
>
>