RE: RE : [lwip-users] Status of IPv6

[Grubb, Jared]

No, I agree that it's not a development priority. I am just trying to
gather some information for the documentation project. I will be doing
some IPv6 work soon, but I'm not sure if that will relate to lwIP or
not. I would enjoy developing the IPv6 code, so, we'll see how that
goes.

Jared

-----Original Message-----
From: address@hidden
[mailto:address@hidden On Behalf Of
Kieran Mansley
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 8:34 AM
To: Mailing list for lwIP users
Subject: RE: RE : [lwip-users] Status of IPv6

On Tue, 2007-07-24 at 08:26 -0700, Grubb, Jared wrote:
> Well, if you're developing a brand new product from scratch, using
IPv6
> is much more desirable. 
> 
> The fact that the current implementation is IPv4-only or IPv6-only
does
> not preclude us from ALSO doing a dual stack, right?

It doesn't, but given that there is no one using IPv6 on lwIP at the
moment (or at least no one who will confess to it!) it doesn't seem like
a productive place to focus our efforts.  If in the future people are
willing to maintain and develop that part of the tree and there is a
demand for it, then it would be good to do something about it, but I'm
in no hurry.

The good part about it being IPv4 *or* IPv6 is that the build isn't in
any way bloated by IPv6 when most people only seem to want IPv4.
Although a dual stack could still have compile time options to remove
one or the other, there would likely still be some residual overhead. 

Kieran



_______________________________________________
lwip-users mailing list
address@hidden
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users