[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Draft: PI addressing derived from AS numbers
Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote:
> > So what I'm getting from this discussion is that 8+8 is too late but
> > 16+16 is too large??? I would agree that 16+16 is too large. How
> > about 4+16?
> I am still curious as to why people think that 16+16 would be any
> different to 8+8.
Because, like 4+16, it can coexist with plain 16. Whether people like
it or not, the product investments in RFC 2460 at this point oblige
any plausible solution to behave as an upgrade to plain 16.