here are a number of people who will tell you that this won't scale and break a number of applications.
Since I proposed it in April 2000, no one told me that this won't scale.
That surprises me. Then again I wasn't aware of you draft until you mailed it here. What WG do see this under? I will comment to multi6 anyway...
There already is running code of of 8+8, transport over it, such as TCP, and applications over it, such as TCP multihomed telephony with no address reselection latency, that there is not much work remaning.
Never mention poor GSE. It is a poor idea useless for any purpose.
Uh, what is the difference between 8+8 and GSE?
Current IPv6, in a sense, is 8+8 and was 10+6.
???? you mean the IID being 8 and the rest the other 8? I don't agree...
GSE is a poor variation of 8+8. GSE is poor because it is an attempt to make ISP operation more complex (that is, less scalable), which has been the tradition of telephone companies to maximize their revenue.
I fail to see what GSE, 8+8 or anything have to do with telephone companies. - kurtis -