Reply to post: Re: IPv4 Address Pool Has Been Expanded Significantly

We've found another problem with IPv6: It's sparked a punch-up between top networks

Nanashi

Re: IPv4 Address Pool Has Been Expanded Significantly

If you insist, I'll answer it directly: yes, I can roughly figure it out. I don't agree that it would be the right way to do it, and at 60 bits I'm not convinced it would be big enough, but it's certainly a way, and I did think I made it clear already that I understood how EzIP is supposed to work.

(I also don't agree that it relies on nothing after RFC791. It relies on a lot of things after RFC791, including its own 43 page draft.)

Now perhaps you could answer my question, so that we can stop flip-flopping between two different definitions for it: what, exactly, do you mean by backwards compatibility? This is a technical matter, given that it concerns the technical capabilities of the things we're talking about.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon