IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Some comments on draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment

Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com> Sat, 23 April 2022 06:06 UTC

Return-Path: <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AA4E3A0847; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 23:06:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.108
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.108 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, 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 bMzqiDycx50x; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 23:06:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl1-x629.google.com (mail-pl1-x629.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::629]) (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 3266C3A081A; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 23:06:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl1-x629.google.com with SMTP id n18so15400135plg.5; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 23:06:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=lfTdAD2PbCjk4/oZQ41iHksnO/SsK1vXZr1r8wiZfUc=; b=JbLtPLeOc/iaBwnQ2zLN6QJDxMUPGLOpSaK6NYk5Gdj1hN42D5u0b+FS3axYjnmoKL i1Q9ZI4niBoL6+6WgJrZ/xVj+DOsXZ+ftoeG4Gm+IugjfMdwIBh5hTJxNqFrVUPYco7m fayC0+2uI8OojjXsdq7kvFg5KU6FIP9fhu3GkTcNsTlzujGinOKdyJvFL8tDZyqRVN2d G46nXJzP586bafln51Azv5Qm3gSe/dgBeLr5NKbSObkuNc4zdbbGSbxdD7x07yU1Ugm9 U0w2HEhvL1tyn7SzdD7yaMXEoZv2QNIRNofo+Ra/EZWux2u8Gg1KRnJjDL1s+1vAiIWe 83tg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=lfTdAD2PbCjk4/oZQ41iHksnO/SsK1vXZr1r8wiZfUc=; b=KcnAKJBZFOAykZOgXSqa4vkbZhUG5o+HoST+U4izYnMyrtaNlk3n59QcObidpDnRqP VMzh6XqJMojtAq0dHnONjLlSxAmCylpwJppdDE39V2mncZ6xP3Q08fQIsmiYqrA2n0UE T2IVtiuJfVGOlrSjO4cyNp3w38o/B2t4CRifCuzXNIhtdLRhkdEp+j0coQBHA7PX8Yya s+Yxr8g027jJlSAaxxC31jH/E4FtYQYRIpIOIgLVaGgYoDrtERPIUNHCrIseBvo27FJl kKhcnTKmhAnoH7wDSge3tLkoRSoi4HwxhHt86iQRzj89tiuxNXtnrmYPjoujBqPpnxuM kQcQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532y7dTqYi310hC721sIKfGLUaReq85Gwho6dHgl/KgJHUzOla5S d1NGgZArdZ0zQ975fDYT5oE=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzYvYG2Lvdo1BVFTRJrxqRmSDyUMflj/2b+8soQygTo1Kco1tQDrHTucHRGHsQK+6htRaYkSw==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:f54d:b0:159:1ff:4eaa with SMTP id h13-20020a170902f54d00b0015901ff4eaamr7803760plf.49.1650693981899; Fri, 22 Apr 2022 23:06:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([2600:8801:d00b:e800:41ee:f04c:ff50:5f0f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id gn8-20020a17090ac78800b001cd4989ff70sm2236108pjb.55.2022.04.22.23.06.20 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 22 Apr 2022 23:06:20 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.100.11\))
From: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <0ae6db1d-c54a-b45f-643e-b7f5a2ceda74@edgeuno.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 23:06:19 -0700
Cc: Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>, draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment@ietf.org, V6 Ops List <v6ops@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <C88522C3-EADE-4BEE-AC87-22B1CAF73823@gmail.com>
References: <3008655b-2af6-7df0-1302-63cf81bad8b4@edgeuno.com> <9064DD1F-48F4-4A17-BDEC-72C0308B9314@gmail.com> <0ae6db1d-c54a-b45f-643e-b7f5a2ceda74@edgeuno.com>
To: Fernando Gont <fernando.gont@edgeuno.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.100.11)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/3HgLLymCrOJ9W-2YcL30Fz9U6HY>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Some comments on draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2022 06:06:28 -0000


> On Apr 22, 2022, at 3:33 PM, Fernando Gont <fernando.gont@edgeuno.com> wrote:
> 
> That's not what I;m saying. I;m just saying IPv6 is fully incompatible
> with IPv4. Do you disagree on this?

I'm not sure what "fully incompatible" means, so the point is somewhat lost on me. 

IPv6 is certainly not compatible with IPv4; it couldn't be, as it has a different and longer address. That said, there were also a number of design decisions made differently than for IPv4, such as the expectation that IPv4 would fragment in flight where the IPv6 designers specifically and emphatically chose to not do that, for a list of reasons, and the difference in implementation of options/extension headers.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email