Re:How Engineers at Digital Equipment Corp. Saved Ethernet
by mixmastamyk on Tuesday April 09, 2024 @08:35PM
(#39985756)
Well, you asked for a design and I gave one. Any change is ultimately going to require a software rollout. (I suppose you could squeeze a byte into an underused header in the short term.)
The argument upthread was that v6 was too big a change, resulting in a slower than anticipated rollout. And perhaps merely shoehorning another byte or two into v4, say v4.1 would be easier and more quickly accepted by the world.
Possibly—I'm not strongly arguing for either, besides the fact that v6 didn't solve any problems I was having besides the world running out of addresses. It's a lot harder to grok at a glance though.
Also, a smaller change wouldn't break existing networks, just like the existence of v6 didn't break v4.
(This is basically the Python 2 to 3 transition argument in global form.)
Re:How Engineers at Digital Equipment Corp. Saved Ethernet
by bluGill on Tuesday April 09, 2024 @08:42PM
(#39985805)
so we did what you proposed. Ipv6 is simpler than ipv4. You can handwave details different but they all suffe, from the same problem of rollout.
Re:How Engineers at Digital Equipment Corp. Saved Ethernet
by mixmastamyk on Tuesday April 09, 2024 @11:13PM
(#39986620)
You have a unique definition of simple.
Re:How Engineers at Digital Equipment Corp. Saved Ethernet
by bluGill on Wednesday April 10, 2024 @09:53AM
(#39990757)
I have actually seen the protocol specs for both IPv4 and IPv6. IPv6 is simpler than IPv4 - but you probably never looked into how to do source address routing which you are required to support when you implement IPv4 even though nobody uses it (If you try I'm sure that the large backbone providers will block it)
How do you do that? I have read the IPv4 protocol spec, there isn't any space to put that byte can still be IPv4. That is what I mean when nobody has proposed anything that I can implement: I have read the spec and it doesn't allow room for what you want to do. Sure conceptually you can describe any number of ideas - but they are not IPv4 and no existing computer or router will work with it - so we may as well go with IPv6 which many smart people spent who understand the real problems of the internet have a lot of effort creating to solve existing problems to the best of their ability.
Brazil didn't just add that leading 0. They planed this well in advance and forced everyone who connects to the phone system to update their systems to support it: you must apply a software update or buy new hardware; otherwise your phones stop working. Of course most of the software and hardware was controlled by the Brazil phone company (s?) and so they could ensure this was all done.
I first found out about Brazil doing this from your comment - yet I can say the above with all confidence because those are things that have to happen behind the scenes to make it work. (I have no doubt people who actually know something about what Brazil did can tell you things I didn't think about)