Re: [Int-area] Continuing IPv10 I-D discussion.

Khaled Omar <> Thu, 30 March 2017 16:29 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DC40129553 for <>; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 09:29:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.147
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.147 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD2=0.874, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TDRRaJ6G1oKj for <>; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 09:29:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D9B41297AA for <>; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 09:29:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=1jLJVPYyhRpbJrVmtWSkxtkKNCZ8adzO2nv1D/J2IHc=; b=CenLXwew9C0lFH2PclGaYHzYkoWAFAMXmMhT2nGEon60Fp6G/KiPQzzptJ/tMHo6xEQDfvmJ656Zw2HWJ4DsQaifgXltdEvjkFjladX1hfxqAIFH8LdnFswI+XGRaHLUK3hbebUeNSGW4buwn7FcQKPNEhzrU9j7uVyzBFu+Y38Tcamso2401ty82QKrk3wPzhsluh40g0tiMSFIHlwnZuHjjXSqdedJ6nUjlg/m+g+LP4L1mEpiARfFsHr+NLSse2J5GqLH0j0qDwbJBglAU258jq19haob+mCeJYt/fM021sykTOFTP6WZFxt6Tz4JxbjozCnCuOoaC4DU4letDQ==
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.977.7; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 16:29:43 +0000
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.1005.5 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 16:29:43 +0000
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.01.0991.022; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 16:29:43 +0000
From: Khaled Omar <>
To: Stephane Bortzmeyer <>
CC: "" <>
Thread-Topic: [Int-area] Continuing IPv10 I-D discussion.
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 16:29:43 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
authentication-results:; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;; dmarc=none action=none;
x-incomingtopheadermarker: OriginalChecksum:6EC209B1CF05F7CD65C43307C2B4C93AE7ECC978A6B4329EFB99FF18F94F8463; UpperCasedChecksum:9F56FAA143A7671AF0BEDCF89128236AB7B17E65FF8E3740F7B17A44B0683D3C; SizeAsReceived:8230; Count:42
x-tmn: [RBNIdCHejIwUuPAtIIGyp0iW31tJ2UbF]
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; VE1EUR01HT123; 5:uFPnEMG021dDemJ95dgcrT9Nt/RavTFtWSLF4Z/AoMqqC/1TrcSP+FLpkEiknaz0RZoBr8TsdugL0xQMdFczF+7Y0DB+/Cpwn5csHRT0ciSFKWGaPhxVe4ThW9TUecJrIMdmfrXs3Bznv28eQKzjYg==; 24:OyH6SsaNhUo4u5kMgYQGkyzuE3P/IvKvkybazS0WhUFo6djDlz6c6SyEyhJvCJniGotaEluH4m4wZ8sfNCzdQMe3WWxiGKmwWqGTiJeyp8c=; 7:GJjdChfh3nZ3N3ie71HJuwzmn4RXD6JZazRlmQiP2XiX4lY7xZcLNh4wOuSIeDGux9Vni7eqytRnvxbLuWC6FHq8d1aWAwGoCi/OyNHbpaDi50YqIZvu+0/ogR7bf+hC1hYCjDTXyH18hiy0QGg14MNMGdLyCXgqfqc+Upqt5JiuumyCdZAQd+jzrJoNSxnXUiAzT2NDi5QKi902i61U9iGssiaaok0rGqe2l6NECeZbkJuvD2+3EwsHSIIUM0r9IVA43XgcT8dD/fRPh3MfE362mAG8P63S0WlVFA977opjM/pY+nO0GT1PpCdK2O2M
x-incomingheadercount: 42
x-eopattributedmessage: 0
x-forefront-antispam-report: EFV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; SFS:(7070007)(98901004); DIR:OUT; SFP:1901; SCL:1; SRVR:VE1EUR01HT123;; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en;
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 4e428071-7dfd-4a28-ad0a-08d47789f8e0
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(22001)(201702061074)(5061506573)(5061507331)(1603103135)(2017031320274)(2017031322274)(1603101448)(1601125374)(1701031045); SRVR:VE1EUR01HT123;
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(444000031); SRVR:VE1EUR01HT123; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:VE1EUR01HT123;
x-forefront-prvs: 02622CEF0A
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 30 Mar 2017 16:29:43.5391 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Internet
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: VE1EUR01HT123
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Continuing IPv10 I-D discussion.
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Internet Area Mailing List <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 16:29:51 -0000

> Same issue with the routers in the path. IPv10 would require *all* of
them to be upgraded for the new packet header format.

What will happen with one router from a specific company will happen with all routers from the same vendors, inserting updates is not that hard, but the case is will they work or not, and my idea works fine but the IETF needs to make up official decisions before the explosion of the Internet :-) the reason why is to get out from an I-D to another one and make a progress.


Khaled Omar

-----Original Message-----
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer [] 
Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 6:01 PM
To: Bless, Roland (TM)
Cc: Khaled Omar;
Subject: Re: [Int-area] Continuing IPv10 I-D discussion.

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 05:02:57PM +0200,
 Bless, Roland (TM) <> wrote 
 a message of 36 lines which said:

> - IPv10 doesn't allow an IPv6-only host to communicate to an
>   IPv4-only host and vice versa as stated in the I-D. Hint: an
>   IPv4-only host has got no idea what an IPv6 address is, let alone
>   an "IPv10 address".

Same issue with the routers in the path. IPv10 would require *all* of
them to be upgraded for the new packet header format. 

> - As others already pointed out:

Indeed, it has been said several times to the author but he keeps not
listening. I wonder why there was a slot at the IETF meeting.