RE: problem statement [was Re: New Version Notification for draft-hinden-ipv4flag-00.txt]

"Manfredi, Albert E" <> Tue, 21 November 2017 21:03 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C48B129486 for <>; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 13:03:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.221
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.221 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VMYUSHAKffy6 for <>; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 13:03:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D55F6126BF6 for <>; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 13:03:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (8.14.4/8.14.4/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id vALL3JlW005459; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 14:03:19 -0700
Received: from ( []) by (8.14.4/8.14.4/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id vALL3I6K005444 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 21 Nov 2017 14:03:18 -0700
Received: from (2002:8988:efdc::8988:efdc) by (2002:8988:eed5::8988:eed5) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 13:03:17 -0800
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 13:03:17 -0800
From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <>
To: Alexandre Petrescu <>, "" <>
Subject: RE: problem statement [was Re: New Version Notification for draft-hinden-ipv4flag-00.txt]
Thread-Topic: problem statement [was Re: New Version Notification for draft-hinden-ipv4flag-00.txt]
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 21:03:17 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 21:03:22 -0000

-----Original Message-----
From: ipv6 [] On Behalf Of Alexandre Petrescu

> When I switched a PC AT 286 from IPX to TCP/IP it was because the
> latter gave access to remote servers and persons rather than just
> big disk on a local LAN. was important because,
> among other things, gave access to RFCs, which IPX LAN server wouldnt.

Enterprise nets were running multiple protocols including IP, and it became easier to just use IP. I would say, analogous to running dual stack today, and then eventually you drop IPv4.

In my case, we had all switched over to WFWG at some point, so we all had the IP stack installed in hosts already. Over time, the only app we were using DECnet for became e-mail (VMSmail), so we simply switched over to a different e-mail system. That seems like where we might end up with IPv4, but not there yet.

At home, ISP dialup service was always IP and only IP. That followed after the enterprise network at work, though.

> This would translate today into putting the RFCs and I-Ds on IPv6 only.
> (datatracker,, etc)  Or the email lists, or the other
> services.

Not really comparable, right? The vast majority of people can't even spell IETF, let alone care about reading RFCs. Yes, even the vast majority of people on enterprise networks, couldn't care less about reading RFCs. So this would just become a nuisance for many people, especially those whose enterprise nets do not support IPv6 yet.