Re: IPv6 Pain Experiment

[Owen DeLong]

> On Oct 7, 2019, at 23:59 , Masataka Ohta <mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> 
> wrote:
> 
> William Herrin wrote:
> 
>>> I think TCPng/UDPng with 32/48 bit port numbers combined with NAT/A+P,
>>> which is obviously fully operational with existing IPv4 backbone, is
>>> better.
> 
>> Not a fan of port numbers.
> 
> Separation between address and port is vague.

Explain that to ICMP packets.

> 
>> If we're going to replace TCP and UDP, initiate
>> the link with a name (e.g. dns name),
> 
> The point of TCP use IP address for identification is hosts
> can confirm IP address is true by 3 way handshaking.

And UDP?

Owen