3 ms·
How exactly would have that solved anything? It would have exactly the same transition issues IPv6 has, since the main issue is that IPv4-only hosts cannot comm
by welterde 5y ago
How exactly would have that solved anything? It would have exactly the same transition issues IPv6 has, since the main issue is that IPv4-only hosts cannot communicate with IPv6-only hosts. And there is no way around that - for any alternative proposal.
- bombcar 5y agoBy making the transition from ipv4 to ipv5 as painless as possible and more like the switch from 32 bit to 64 bit addressing in CPU architectures. At some point everything is 32 byte safe by default and then it’s just working. IPv4 to IPv6 is nowhere as simple, IPv6 brings tons of new baggage along with it.
- welterde 5y agoSwitch of CPU architecture is only a local problem. Switching the communication protocol is a local, remote and all the parts in between problem.
- commandersaki 5y agoDJB did have a proposal called AutoIPv6 which had both interoperability between v4 and v6: https://web.archive.org/web/20021017164820/http://cr.yp.to/proto/ipv6.html https://web.archive.org/web/20021017164820/http://cr.yp.to/p... . So in theory it's doable, but in practice I don't think the technologies used worked out. Ultimately tunnelling and anycast is the way to do interoperability.
- welterde 5y agoIt doesn't really solve the main issue here in that IPv4-only hosts (which are not aware of IPv6-anything, have no 6to4, AutoIPv6, anything) cannot talk to IPv6 hosts. For the inverse direction there is the DNS64+NAT64 combo which works fairly well.
- commandersaki 5y agoI don't really see the issue to worry about IPv4-only hosts that are not IPv6-aware. Virtually all TCP/IP stacks connected to the Internet have IPv6-capabilities.
- welterde 5y agoBut if IPv6 is disabled or are not using 6to4/6rd if no native connectivity is available are they really IPv6 capable?