[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ICANN-EU] Re: [icann-candidates] IPv6
- To: Lutz Donnerhacke <lutz@iks-jena.de>
- Subject: Re: [ICANN-EU] Re: [icann-candidates] IPv6
- From: Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>
- Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 19:40:02 -0700
- CC: icann-europe@fitug.de
- Comment: This message comes from the icann-europe mailing list.
- Organization: INEGroup Spokesman
- References: <200009022118.VAA08192@dg8fz.ampr.org> <4.3.2.7.0.20000903124411.00bf2d10@pop.free.fr> <slrn8r7200.jau.lutz@belenus.iks-jena.de>
- Sender: owner-icann-europe@fitug.de
Lutz and all,
However IPV8 solves or does not include the many problems
with IPv6. As a long standing working group member of the
IPv6 WG, I can personally attest to this fact. Yet until recently
the IETF did not recognize IPv8, it does now though...
Lutz Donnerhacke wrote:
> * Jefsey Morfin wrote:
> >>From: Bob Alberti <alberti@tcfreenet.org>
> >> > What are candidate's thoughts regarding IPv6?
>
> As written three weeks ago: BGP4 and IPv6 provider prefixes are limited. So
> IPv6 does not solve the problem of provider attitude, but eases routing.
> OTOH IPv6 dramatically reduce the number of official numbers given to office
> or home computers due to the link/side local uni/anycast addresses and
> autoconfiguration features. So IPv6 will serve the job much better than
> IPv4, but cause other problems, because the primary provider prefixes are
> limited and should mirror the current interconnection state, which will not
> work in the long term.
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 112k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number: 972-447-1800 x1894 or 9236 fwd's to home ph#
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208