News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on IPv10. Parent comment

Re:IPv10 by oarsinsync on Thursday September 07, 2017 @11:03AM (#15192478)
If only we didn't have multiple competing transitional mechanisms defined as standards already.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:IPv10 by ZenoArrow on Thursday September 07, 2017 @01:36PM (#15194033)
You're suggesting there are networking standards that compete with IPv4/IPv6? What are those standards?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:IPv10 by mcguire on Thursday September 07, 2017 @02:23PM (#15194465)
There's like 4 (?) different IPv4/v6 integration systems. None of which worked the last time I fiddled with some of them.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:IPv10 by ZenoArrow on Thursday September 07, 2017 @03:47PM (#15195099)
Which would suggest there's room for an integration system that does work. In any case, the goal is a transition to IPv6, as long as the integration systems all share that goal there can be interoperability between them.
[ Parent | on HN ]