Subject: Re: v6 (was Re: -current sendmail cancer in IPv4-only kernel)
To: Greywolf <email@example.com>
From: Andrew Brown <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 05/08/2000 12:23:02
>1. Do ATM or ISO OSI attempt to deal with the limited address space in
> which we currently live?
>2. Are we not running the ISO stack in networking right now? I thought
> the "old" TCP/IP stack had already been phased out (I can hear it
> already: "Gods, NO! Where have you been?"). Never mind :-)
> Just as well. The ISO stack is really a nine-layer model with
> "Bureaucracy" and "Finance" as the top two layers in the stack...
>And given that IPv6 is the only one that appears to me to be dealing with
>address space issues, and the only one which is really being pushed out
>there, I'm placing my bet on IPv6. It's probably better thought out
>than either of the other two mentioned.
i think (i don't pretend to know all that much about the iso stuff or
atm, but i am reading) that one *MAJOR* difference between atm and ip
(and maybe iso as well) is that that ipv6 works with *all* the
existing hardware that's already doing ipv4. iso and atm require
other hardware. that seems like major selling point to me.
|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|
email@example.com * "ah! i see you have the internet
firstname.lastname@example.org (Andrew Brown) that goes *ping*!"
email@example.com * "information is power -- share the wealth."