OT - IPng, aka, but perhaps incorrectly [?], IPv6
Dave, The next generation IP protocol, which appears finally to be IPv6, will not be a flash cut, as I'm sure you know. I'm now being told that some v4 machines may last on the 'net for a very very long time, while the rest of the net gradually migrates to the new protocol.
Some are now revisiting this need, and wondering if v6 is the way to go at all!
Assuming that it will be implemented at some point in time, there will be a lengthy transition from IPv4 to IPv6. In the interim, these two versions must co-exist in a kind of dual-personality manner - schizophrenic, you could say.
Mike Ross, one of my colleagues on the Network Magazine Forum on Compuserve, recently put together a tutorial which I'd like to quote from, in this regard:
---
"With the size of the Internet and the critical nature of many of the applications running on the Internet it is not possible to switch from IPv4 to IPv6 overnight. There is a strong possibility that there will be an IPv4 host on the Internet forever. Therefor, there is a need for IPv4 hosts and IPv6 host to communicate with each other.
The transition plan must address the following general areas of the Internet's infrastructure:
- Host Protocols and Software
- Router Protocols and Software
- Security and Authentication
- Domain Name System
- Network Management
- Operations Tools (e.g., Ping and Traceroute)
- Operations and Administration procedures"
I think that it's readily apparent here that the transition would be equally taxing from an administrative and engineering standpoint, as it would be from the financial burden of new routers.
The following link points to the IETF Next Generation working group page:
ietf.org
Excerpt:
Description of Working Group:
Editor: Bob Hinden (hinden@eng.sun.com)
The next generation of the Internet Protocol (IPv6) is intended to support Internet traffic for many years into the future by providing enhancements over the capabilities of the existing IPv4 service. This working group will produce specifications for the core functionality of that service. The working group shall carry out the recommendations of the IPng Area Directors as outlined at the July 1994 IETF and in ''The Recommendation for the IP Next Generation Protocol,'' Internet-Draft, (draft-ipng-recommendation-00.txt), September 1994.
An interesting point is made in one of the Japanese IETF FAQ pages, in that IPng and IPv6 are not [necessarily] the same. Whereas ng stands for next generation, v6 is the specific name of a protocol set.
The requests for comments,or RFCs, for IPv6 can be found at:
info.internet.isi.edu
Regards, Frank Coluccio |
