From: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: "PKU.孙斌" <bswen@pku.edu.cn>, "Willy Tarreau" <w@1wt.eu>,
"Linux Kernel Network Developers" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 答复: ANNOUNCE: Enhanced IP v1.4
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 07:56:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALx6S348s=_QZx_geCySN+duYANeMZZfbdzFzqj87r-q+O95sw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4d9e164d-58e3-caa0-a378-b9681eefa9d7@gmail.com>
On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 6:02 AM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 06/03/2018 10:58 PM, PKU.孙斌 wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 03, 2018 at 03:41:08PM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 06/03/2018 01:37 PM, Tom Herbert wrote:
>>>
>>>> This is not an inconsequential mechanism that is being proposed. It's
>>>> a modification to IP protocol that is intended to work on the
>>>> Internet, but it looks like the draft hasn't been updated for two
>>>> years and it is not adopted by any IETF working group. I don't see how
>>>> this can go anywhere without IETF support. Also, I suggest that you
>>>> look at the IPv10 proposal since that was very similar in intent. One
>>>> of the reasons that IPv10 shot down was because protocol transition
>>>> mechanisms were more interesting ten years ago than today. IPv6 has
>>>> good traction now. In fact, it's probably the case that it's now
>>>> easier to bring up IPv6 than to try to make IPv4 options work over the
>>>> Internet.
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Many hosts do not use IPv4 anymore.
>>>
>>> We even have the project making IPv4 support in linux optional.
>>
>> I guess then Linux kernel wouldn't be able to boot itself without IPv4 built in, e.g., when we only have old L2 links (without the IPv6 frame type)...
>
>
>
> *Optional* means that a CONFIG_IPV4 would be there, and some people could build a kernel with CONFIG_IPV4=n,
>
> Like IPv6 is optional today.
>
> Of course, most distros will select CONFIG_IPV4=y (as they probably select CONFIG_IPV6=y today)
>
> Do not worry, IPv4 is not dead, but I doubt Enhanced IP v1.4 has any chance,
> it is at least 10 years too late.
There's also https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/05/30/internet_engineers_united_nations_ipv6/.
We're reaching the point where it's the transition mechnanisms that
are hampering IPv6 adoption.
Tom
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-06-04 14:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-06-02 1:48 ANNOUNCE: Enhanced IP v1.4 Sam Patton
2018-06-02 5:57 ` Willy Tarreau
2018-06-02 16:17 ` Sam Patton
2018-06-02 17:02 ` Willy Tarreau
2018-06-03 20:37 ` Tom Herbert
2018-06-03 22:41 ` Eric Dumazet
2018-06-04 4:34 ` Willy Tarreau
2018-06-04 5:58 ` 答复: " PKU.孙斌
2018-06-04 13:02 ` Eric Dumazet
2018-06-04 14:56 ` Tom Herbert [this message]
2018-06-05 12:33 ` Bjørn Mork
2018-06-05 12:41 ` Willy Tarreau
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CALx6S348s=_QZx_geCySN+duYANeMZZfbdzFzqj87r-q+O95sw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=tom@herbertland.com \
--cc=bswen@pku.edu.cn \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=w@1wt.eu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).