V6 still not supported
johnl at iecc.com
Sun Mar 20 02:14:13 UTC 2022
It appears that Matt Hoppes <mattlists at rivervalleyinternet.net> said:
>Just like with IPv6, there would be a transition period, but during that
>time software updates would very easily bring equipment up to spec much
>faster and quicker.
>Eventually, 192.168.0.1 would be represented (for example) as
>0.0.0.0.192.168.0.1 (or something similar - I haven't really sketched
>out the logistics on paper).
Sounds just like an IPv4-mapped IPv6 address, which is ::ffff:192.168.0.1.
See RFC 1884, written in 1995, and the other RFCs which update it but don't
change this particular aspect.
What's the difference?
More information about the NANOG