From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1-g21.free.fr (smtp1-g21.free.fr [IPv6:2a01:e0c:1:1599::10]) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47B7B21F159; Mon, 7 Jan 2013 21:18:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from pirx.pps.jussieu.fr (bob75-6-82-238-73-9.fbx.proxad.net [82.238.73.9]) by smtp1-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 942069400B2; Tue, 8 Jan 2013 06:18:02 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=pirx.pps.jussieu.fr) by pirx.pps.jussieu.fr with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1TsRZb-0003Tx-WB; Tue, 08 Jan 2013 06:18:04 +0100 Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 06:18:03 +0100 Message-ID: <87mwwkz20k.wl%jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> From: Juliusz Chroboczek To: dpreed@reed.com Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] cerowrt-next plans In-Reply-To: <1353713218.198812384@apps.rackspace.com> References: <1353705975.992510644@apps.rackspace.com> <1353713218.198812384@apps.rackspace.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: bloat-devel , cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-BeenThere: bloat-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers working on AQM, device drivers, and networking stacks" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 05:18:21 -0000 Sorry for the extremely late reply (it's been over a month!), but I'm only slowly recovering from a massive mail backlog. >>> it occurs to me that AHCP might be a better choice than the >>> alternatives for use in Amateur Radio internet environments with IPv6. >> Why do you need IPV6 for HAM use > Two reasons come to mind - I'm sure there are more. Another reason is that a number of things are much easier to implement in IPv6. This is especially true of link-local stuff, which is highly non-portable in IPv4, and quite reasonable in IPv4. That's the main reason why I never bothered defining AHCP over IPv4 -- the current implementation of AHCP is almost completely portable POSIX code, while a typical DHCPv4 implementation needs to manually craft IP packets and push them through a raw socket. (The Babel protocol is defined over both IPv4 and IPv6, has it's only ever been implemented over link-local IPv6. Note that that it can advertise IPv4 routes, it just happens to carry them over IPv6.) In short -- IPv6 helps keeping the developers sane. And that's hopefully worth a few wasted bits here and there. -- Juliusz