Subject: Re: more on IPv6 address space exhaustion

From: [email-masked] (Sean Doran)
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 17:08:24 +0200 (CEST)

Thomas Narten writes:

| So, once again, it appears
| necessary to point out that approaches that work fine in IPv4 work
| just as well in IPv6. But IPv6 also enables new approaches as well,
| some of which are not really practical in IPv4.

You and I are in perfect agreement, though -- I simply point out
that the idea apparently floated by the committee with the folks from 
e.g.  PSI, NSI, Yahoo!, and so forth is made possible by the new approach
to multihoming in IPv6.  Dividing up the IPv4 address space into 
a "kid-friendly" and "other" space is not really practical.

So I don't understand your accusation of a "major misrepresentation
about what is *required* by IPv6 versus what is ... possible".

	Sean.

---

From: "Yixin Zhu" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 10:48:48 -0500

Hi,

I am interested in knowing the conformance test for MGCP and SIP. Can
someone here tell me the scheduled bakeoff meetings for MGCP and SIP for
this year and next year.

Thanks,

Yixin Zhu

---

From: Keith Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 13:02:46 -0400

>  Dividing up the IPv4 address space into

it's not practical in IPv6 either.   

Keith