|
|
|
|
|
|
by zinekeller
1760 days ago
|
|
|
> So if all the IPv4 code is written to handle 32-bit addresses, how do you create an addressing system that has more than 32-bits of data, but fits with-in a 32-bit data structure? IETF also asked that for AS numbers (which were only ~60,000 originally!) Sure enough, there were some reserved bits actually on the spec, which they used to add an extended address. Nowadays, the original BGP actually operates on a single number: AS23456 and the actual AS number is on that reserved spot. What's worse is that it was actually already proposed in 1992 (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc1347). Did it work? Actually, yes! Why IPv6 then? Because it's shiny! |
|
|
> The long term goal of the TUBA proposal involves transition to a worldwide Internet which operates much as the current Internet, but with CLNP replacing IP and with NSAP addresses replacing IP addresses.
[…]
In §3 Migration:
> Updated Internet hosts talk to old Internet hosts using the current Internet suite unchanged. Updated Internet hosts talk to other updated Internet hosts using (TCP or UDP over) CLNP. This implies that updated Internet hosts must be able to send either old-style packets (using IP), or new style packet (using CLNP). Which to send is determined via the normal name-to-address lookup.
So you're replacing IPv4 with something that is not-IPv4 on every router and every host. During the transition period everyone will have IPv4 and not-IPv4 addresses.
How is not-IPv4 being CLNP/NSAP any different that not-IPv4 being IPv6? What am I missing?
In §6 on DNS:
> TUBA requires that a new DNS resource record entry type ("long-address") be defined, to store longer Internet (i.e., NSAP) addresses.
Which is basically describing AAAA records.