Date: Sun, 5 May 1996 02:38:22 -0500 From: Jim Fleming <JimFleming@unety.net> To: Darren Reed <avalon@coombs.anu.edu.au>, "'Jordan K. Hubbard'" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> Cc: "FreeBSD-hackers@freebsd.org" <FreeBSD-hackers@freebsd.org>, Warner Losh <imp@village.org> Subject: RE: IPv8 Tutorial #1: Minimal IPv8 hack Message-ID: <01BB3A2B.EE6323E0@webster.unety.net>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sunday, May 05, 1996 1:33 AM, Jordan K. Hubbard[SMTP:jkh@time.cdrom.com] wrote: @ Well, if nothing else it's pretty confusing. When I first saw this @ mentioned, before receiving clarification, my reaction was to go @ "What?! IPv6 isn't even out yet, now somebody's talking about IPv8?? @ What the &*^%@#$! is going on here?!?" @ @ These changes should start going under a different operating title, at @ the very least. @ @ Jordan @ <snip> C+@nIP is a good name...:-) BTW, IPv6 is also referred to as IPng (IP Next Generation) The 8 in IPv8 refers to the fact that the bit with a value 8 is used to tag the packets and borrow the rest of the version field and the header length field. The actual value of that bit if you consider bytes is 128. I considered calling this IPv128 but some thought that would be confusing because IPv6 uses 128 bit addresses. Keep in mind from a code point of view there are two views. 1. The view of the person that has an IPv4 implementation. (FreeBSD falls in this C+@tegory) 2. The view of the person that has IPv8 and wants hacks for IPv4. In this second view, IPv4 is an optimization of IPv8 for a limited 32 bit address space. This is similar to the PPP optimizations for IP. With this view, IPv8 and IPv4 are good names, because IPv8 supports more "cylinders" just as in a car. -- Jim Fleming UNETY Systems, Inc. Naperville, IL e-mail: JimFleming@unety.net
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?01BB3A2B.EE6323E0>