[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 10:30 PM, wes wrote: > the crux seems to lie here: > >> The specifications [for IPv6] could have defined a functionally >> equivalent public IPv6 address for each public IPv4 address, >> embedding the IPv4 address space into the IPv6 address space; but >> they didn't. > > this design decision is utterly baffling to me. I really fail to see how this would have made a difference. If a device (like a router) doesn't know about IPv6, it can't "fall back to IPv4", as it doesn't know how this falling back would work. So it would need to be reprogrammed to understand this falling back. IPv6 is a different protocol. It's not just IPv4 with longer addresses. Martijn. -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq