On 06/03/2018 01:37 PM, Tom Herbert wrote:
> This is not an inconsequential mechanism that is being proposed. It's
> a modification to IP protocol that is intended to work on the
> Internet, but it looks like the draft hasn't been updated for two
> years and it is not adopted by any IETF working group. I don't see how
> this can go anywhere without IETF support. Also, I suggest that you
> look at the IPv10 proposal since that was very similar in intent. One
> of the reasons that IPv10 shot down was because protocol transition
> mechanisms were more interesting ten years ago than today. IPv6 has
> good traction now. In fact, it's probably the case that it's now
> easier to bring up IPv6 than to try to make IPv4 options work over the
> Internet.
+1
Many hosts do not use IPv4 anymore.
We even have the project making IPv4 support in linux optional.
