[governance] IPv4-v6 - "coexistence" not transition - operational issues surfacing

[Izumi AIZU]

I agree with Thomas in that my original intention was, first of all,
to share good information on the issue among us.

I do not think to have detailed technical discussion HERE is that suitable.
Many people, like me, are not experts in IP technology, and may be just
confused if we hear too much details.

What I liked to see was/is a well-informed dialogue on policy matters.
Of course, that require accurate knowledge on facts around technology,
and I welcome the contributions to lead to that direction. If Thomas
and others could provide such pointers that will be very valuable I think.
But, going into details is like "seeing the woods but not the forests"
as we say in Japanese.

best,

izumi


2008/2/21, Thomas Narten <narten at us.ibm.com>:
>
> > IPv6 DOES have variable length in the architecture.
>
>
> IPv6 does not have variable length addresses. But this list hardly
> seems an appropriate place to have a discussion about such technical
> details.
>
> Really!
>
>
> Thomas
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20080222/484cc230/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance