RE: Last Call: draft-ietf-16ng-ipv6-over-ipv6cs (IPv6 Over the IPSpecific part of the Packet Convergence sublayer in 802.16 Networks) toProposed Standard

["Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi at boeing.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Carlson [mailto:james.d.carlson at sun.com] 

> I've read through the document as well as (most of) the mailing list
> discussion, and I don't see anything that directly addresses one
> possible issue here.
> 
> That issue is the exclusive use of IPv4 or IPv6 on Packet CS.  Why
> must it be exclusive?  The first four bits of the datagram tell you
> conclusively whether you're looking at IPv4 or IPv6, so why is strict
> segregation needed?
> 
> Can't both run on the same link?

For that matter, why was this same segregation standardized for
Ethernet? I always wondered about that.

Bert

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf