The length of the address (64 vs 128) is not the hard part. Just increases the cost and the complexity of the ASIC ;-) The extension headers become a real problem when L4 filtering is desired. Bora On 6/28/07 2:46 PM, "Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu" <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu> wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 13:08:52 PDT, Bora Akyol said:
At a very low, hardware centric level, IPv6 would be a lot easier to implement if
1) The addresses were 64 bits instead of 128 bits. 2) The extension headers architecture was completely revamped to be more hardware friendly.
Wow, a blast from the past. The *current* IPv6 design was selected to a good extent because it was *easier* to do in hardware than some of the other contenders. You think 64 versus 128 is tough - think about the ASIC fun and games to support *variable length* addresses (not necessarily even a multiple of 4 bytes, in some of the proposals. Could be 7, could be 11, check the address length field for details. Yee. Hah).