Hacker News
points by mahboi 11 hours ago | 0 comments
This gets brought up on every ipv6-related submission, and the basic idea is sound. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48781622
[–] cowlevel 10 hours ago
Not really, it assumes people will make IPv5 devices without a reason to. If you can get them to make IPv5 you can use the same mechanism to get them to make IPv4/6 dual-stack.
[–] mahboi 10 hours ago
People already make ipv6 devices, that's not the problem though. It's also maybe possible to do ipv5 with ipv6 hardware at least on the hosts, since the v6 header is totally fine for this.
[–] cowlevel 4 hours ago
Well then how's that different from just v6?
[–] mahboi 3 hours ago
V4 address blocks, DHCP, and NAT, not SLAAC. So if I have 1.2.3.4 in ipv4, my ipv5 address is also 1.2.3.4. Ipv5 isn't a separate network from v4, it shares all the v4 state, and I can enable without giving it much thought. And once there's enough adoption, I can start handing out addresses like 1.2.3.4.5 that are incompatible with v4-only hosts.