[discuss] Report from the BR meeting local organizing group - Dec 2013

Roland Perry roland at internetpolicyagency.com
Tue Dec 31 16:22:42 UTC 2013

In message <52C1CE65.6080308 at gmail.com>, at 08:49:57 on Tue, 31 Dec 
2013, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com> writes
>> If IPv6 had been devised as backwards compatible, then my problems (and
>> those of millions of other business users) would be much less.
>This meme needs to die. IPv4 is the problem - since it contains no
>provision for variable length addresses, there is mathematically no
>such thing as a backwards-compatible design for extended addresses.
>We didn't invent the dual stack mechanism because we liked it, but
>because (regardless of all design details of IPv6) there was mathematically
>no alternative.

You just need to add a sufficient number of zeros in front of the IPv4 
space, to give it a niche in IPv6 space.

(Or something a bit more sophisticated if there's a good reason to do 
Roland Perry

More information about the discuss mailing list