Subject: DNS

From: "Bill Cunningham" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 07:45:07 -0400

I've come in late on this nameserver thread. Is this talk of IPv8 for real?
IPv5 fell through, now will IPv6?

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2002 15:05:53 +0200

> I've come in late on this nameserver thread. Is this talk of IPv8 for real?

No, it's a protracted joke that has long ago ceased to be funny.

> IPv5 fell through, now will IPv6?

No. It's shipping.

   Brian

---

From: Donald Eastlake 3rd <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 09:29:06 -0400 (EDT)

"real"?

The "real" assignment of IP version numbers is documented on line at
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/version-numbers>.  IPv8 was one of the
candidates to succeed IPv4, along with IPv6 and IPv7. It was not
selected, IPv6 was choosen instead and that is where all the current
effort in this area is going. But the allocation for IPv8 is still in
place and IPv8, as assigned by IANA, could be used experimentally. See
RFC 1621, etc.

Donald

PS: None of this has anything to do with various alleged versions of
"IP" endlessly promoted by Mr. Jim Flaming which, as per the recent
message from the IETF Chair, don't have anything to do with the IETF.

On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Bill Cunningham wrote:

> Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 07:45:07 -0400
> From: Bill Cunningham <[email-masked]>
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: DNS
> 

======================================================================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd                       [email-masked]
 155 Beaver Street              +1-508-634-2066(h) +1-508-851-8280(w)
 Milford, MA 01757 USA                   [email-masked]

---

From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 08:27:39 -0500

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Brian E Carpenter" <[email-masked]>
To: "Bill Cunningham" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 8:05 AM
Subject: Re: DNS

> > IPv5 fell through, now will IPv6?

Is IBM still involved ?
http://amsterdam.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9909/msg00035.html
http://amsterdam.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0206/msg00155.html

What does IBM pay each year to lease this space ?
http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space
009/8           IBM                                     Aug 92
=================

Jim Fleming
2002:[IPv4]:000X:03DB:...IPv8 is closer than you think...
http://ipv8.dyndns.tv
http://ipv8.yi.org
http://ipv8.dyns.cx
http://ipv8.no-ip.com
http://ipv8.no-ip.org
http://ipv8.no-ip.biz
http://ipv8.no-ip.info
http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/unir.txt

---

From: Bill Manning <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 09:26:27 -0700 (PDT)

% I've come in late on this nameserver thread. Is this talk of IPv8 for real?
% IPv5 fell through, now will IPv6?
% 

	Check the IANA pages for authorized IP version assignments.

-- 
--bill

---

From: "Haren Visavadia" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 20:19:16 +0100

IPv8 is an authorised IP version assignment

This is IANA authorized IP version assignments :

VERSION NUMBERS

In the Internet Protocol (IP) [RFC791] there is a field to identify
the version of the internetwork general protocol.  This field is 4
bits in size.

Assigned Internet Version Numbers

Decimal   Keyword    Version                            References
-------   -------    -------                            ----------
    0                Reserved                                [JBP]
  1-3                Unassigned                              [JBP]
    4       IP       Internet Protocol                [RFC791,JBP]
    5       ST       ST Datagram Mode                [RFC1190,JWF]
    6       IPv6     Internet Protocol version 6         [RFC1752]
    7       TP/IX    TP/IX: The Next Internet                [RXU]
    8       PIP      The P Internet Protocol                 [PXF]
    9       TUBA     TUBA                                    [RXC]
10-14                Unassigned                              [JBP]
   15                Reserved                                [JBP]

REFERENCES
----------

[RFC791] Postel, J., ed., "Internet Protocol - DARPA Internet Program
         Protocol Specification", STD 5, RFC 791, USC/Information
         Sciences Institute, September 1981.

[RFC1190] Topolcic, C., Editor, "Experimental Internet Stream
          Protocol, Version 2 (ST-II)", RFC 1190, CIP Working Group,
          October 1990.

[RFC1752] Bradner, S., and A. Mankin, "The Recommendation for the IP
	  Next Generation Protocol", RFC 1752, Harvard University,
	  ISI, January 1995.

PEOPLE
------

[JPB] Jon Postel <[email-masked]>

[JWF] Jim Forgie <[email-masked]>

[RH6] Robert Hinden <[email-masked]>

[RXU] Robert Ullmann <[email-masked]>

[PXF] Paul Francis <[email-masked]>

[RXC] Ross Callon <[email-masked]>

[Deering] Steve Deering, <[email-masked]>, March 1995.

(last updated May 01 2001)

[]

---

From: Scott W Brim <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 15:39:43 -0400

On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 08:19:16PM +0100, Haren Visavadia allegedly wrote:
> ...

Yes, version number 8 was assigned to PIP.  That has nothing to do with
what some people are calling IPv8 on this list (and others).

---

From: "Bill Strahm" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 13:40:56 -0700

Well to be honest, shouldn't you say A Person is calling IPv8 on this
and other lists ???

I am not sure of anyone else that is currently talking about IPv8 other
than those that have accidently gotten pulled in by the troll.

Bill

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
Scott W Brim
Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 12:40 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: DNS

---

From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 18:32:45 -0500

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bill Manning" <[email-masked]>
To: "Bill Cunningham" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 11:26 AM
Subject: Re: DNS

> Check the IANA pages for authorized IP version assignments.

Is this reply from an Alice BOT ?
http://alice.sunlitsurf.com/live.html

Have you asked John ?
http://triumphpc.com/johnlennon/index.shtml

--------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.opendemocracy.net/forum/document_details.asp?CatID=12&DocID=482

"My job was only to express the board's opinion as a whole. Unfortunately
it had very few opinions, because it didn't know very much, and its
opinions were supposed to reflect a mostly nonexistent consensus."
                      - Esther Dyson 

--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: "Haren Visavadia" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 16:53:14 +0100

Please can you clarity what you mean by "Ipv8" and what are its drafts ?

---

From: Christopher Evans <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2002 21:38:10 -0800

damn.   I stil try to pass my semester 3 on ipv4 and you all starting to 
kickstart ipv8?  how am I to keep up?!? 

ugh.  when are the roll out of ipv6?    why roll out v8 when majority are still 
on ipv4? ugh.

--chris
http://digitalatoll.flnet.org/

---

From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 01:06:23 -0500

Relax, IPv8 is just IPv4 on steroids....

---

From: "Haren Visavadia" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 17:41:14 +0100

1. Jim Fleming is talking his own internet protcol and is unofficial.

2. IETF has not announced that IPv6 deployment is going be abandoned,
therefore the IPv6
Deployment will contune.

3. This thread on "ipv8" already has been discussed in the past, so this
discussion regarding "ipv8" is date of out.