IPv6 Pain Experiment

J. Hellenthal jhellenthal at dataix.net
Sun Oct 6 21:35:04 UTC 2019


And in which part of the header is this to be added ?

-- 
 J. Hellenthal

The fact that there's a highway to Hell but only a stairway to Heaven says a lot about anticipated traffic volume.

> On Oct 6, 2019, at 15:58, bzs at theworld.com wrote:
> 
> 
>> On October 6, 2019 at 15:18 mpalmer at hezmatt.org (Matt Palmer) wrote:
>>> On Sat, Oct 05, 2019 at 04:36:50PM -0400, bzs at theworld.com wrote:
>>> 
>>> On October 4, 2019 at 15:26 owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> OK… Let’s talk about how?
>>>> 
>>>> How would you have made it possible for a host that only understands 32-bit addresses to exchange traffic with a host that only has a 128-bit address?
>>> 
>>> A bit in the header or similar (version field) indicating extending
>>> addressing (what we call IPv6, or similar) is in use for this packet.
>> 
>> How does that allow the host that only understands 32-bit addresses to
>> exchange traffic with a host which sets this header bit?
> 
> As I said, it doesn't, but it lets each host decide that rather than
> the router tho if the host just knows enough to copy out the entire
> src/dst address (imagine the bits beyond the first 32 were in
> something like an extended ICMP options field w/in the IP header) then
> the rest could operate identically to ipv4.
> 
> So all you'd need added to a host IPv4 stack would be if you see this
> extended addressing flag/bit/whatever then there's more that needs to
> be copied out to each outgoing IP packet.
> 
> It would be the routers' job to interpret those extra bits for routing.
> 
> -- 
>        -Barry Shein
> 
> Software Tool & Die    | bzs at TheWorld.com             | http://www.TheWorld.com
> Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD       | 800-THE-WRLD
> The World: Since 1989  | A Public Information Utility | *oo*



More information about the NANOG mailing list