From owner-freebsd-current  Wed Apr 24 14:09:53 1996
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id OAA25252
          for current-outgoing; Wed, 24 Apr 1996 14:09:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rover.village.org (rover.village.org [204.144.255.49])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA25244
          for <current@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 24 Apr 1996 14:09:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rover.village.org (8.7.5/8.6.6) with SMTP id PAA15418; Wed, 24 Apr 1996 15:09:19 -0600 (MDT)
Message-Id: <199604242109.PAA15418@rover.village.org>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.tfs.com>
Subject: Re: SLIP: Check IP Version (please test) 
Cc: Paul Traina <pst@shockwave.com>, current@FreeBSD.ORG,
        Jim Fleming <JimFleming@unety.net>
In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 24 Apr 1996 06:35:29 -0000
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 15:09:18 -0600
From: Warner Losh <imp@village.org>
Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

: I agree, the point is that people play with IPv8 and it breaks slip.

There is no IPv8 that the IETF has defined.  Others may have co-opted
that name.  There is no reason to wrorry about it.  IPv6, on the other
hand, is being actively defined....

That said, will the extra two instructions really cause people grief?

Warner