Subject: (IPng 6516) Another Terrible Mistake or Another Terrific Move ?

From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 08:12:50 -0500

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] <[email-masked]>
<snip>

>Why permit host fragmentation and forbid network fragmentation?
>

IPv6 was designed by people that openly write in their
documents and books that they think ATM is....

    "Another Terrible Mistake"

An IPv6 header is typically 40 bytes. An ATM cell payload is 48 bytes.
There is not a lot of room to do anything useful. Some people see
that as a "feature" or benefit of IPv6. Some also see the fragmentation
design as a feature and Another Terrific Move (ATM) of IPv6 designers.

The typical IPv8 (and IPv16) header is 20 bytes. It was designed to be
ATM-friendly. Some people view IPv8 as Another Terrible Mistake and
others view it as Another Terrific Move. Since IPv8 is basically a rework
of IPv4, it is hard to imagine how it could be such a big mistake since
IPv4 has served people well for several years. Despite that, the debates
will continue...ATM or ATM...?...that is the question...

Jim Fleming
Unir Corporation - http://www.unir.com
End-2-End: VPC(Java)---C+@---<IPv8>---C+@---(Java)VPC
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/unir.txt
http://www.ddj.com/index/author/idx10133.htm

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------