Egregoros

I assumed this was a 1 April publication but nope, it appears to be real. My favorite part is how it basically pretends IPv6 doesn't exist except for a couple mentions of basically "no one likes v6."

https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-thain-ipv8-00.html

@cR0w I think we can safely assume adoption will be *zero* of this. The main lesson of IPv6 is that change on a global scale is very very hard.

@dch @cR0w If it keeps IPv4 intact and lets us cleanly add those ASNs, I think it will see widespread adoption. People hate IPv6 because it’s got letters, semicolons, and an eclectic mix of address lengths. Slapping a number in front of IPv4 makes a lot more sense to people.

@ClickyMcTicker I don’t expect any large vendors to expend any effort on this. If you can’t get MS and Cisco etc onboard then this is already dead man walking. No comment on whether it’s good or desirable, just this has a classic first mover disadvantage. You expend millions across your product line to make it compatible for something nobody wants. Does anybody with money want this enough to get those companies to do it? @cR0w

@dch @ClickyMcTicker @cR0w I really hope it's real because this dual stack world is terrible squared

@feld so we’d have … what a triple stack world? complexity and exploits cubed I guess @ClickyMcTicker @cR0w

@dch @ClickyMcTicker @cR0w why would it be triple stack? you put IPv6 in the bin where it belongs and you have a hybrid dual-stack where new infra can take advantage of the new address space and old infra works transparently