2005-1, good or bad? [Was: Re: Shim6 vs PI addressing]

Per Heldal heldal at eml.cc
Tue Mar 7 22:28:00 UTC 2006

On Mon, 6 Mar 2006 11:24:59 +0100, "Kurt Erik Lindqvist"
<kurtis at kurtis.pp.se> said:
> Ok, so shim6 doesn't require a change to the transport layer and it  
> doesn't change the forwarding plane. It does create a mapping state  
> at the end-nodes. So claiming it to be either is probably wrong.

I stand corrected. Was commenting from a flawed perspective. The most
correct is probably to consider it a sub-layer to the existing L3.

  Per Heldal

More information about the NANOG mailing list