In message <E1FBGaG-0006mM-00@smeg.dsg.stanford.edu>, jonathan@dsg.stanford.edu
 writes:
>
>In message <20060220191428.1832E3BFC82@berkshire.machshav.com>,
>"Steven M. Bellovin" writes:
>>A certain large vendor in the upper-left corner of the US is strongly 
>>committed to IPv6.  Its next release, Vista, will *prefer* v6 
>>connections if they're available.  Rumor has it that their future plans 
>>*really* need v6.  We're better off beating on our stack now, 
>>especially anything to do with operating in a mixed environment.
>
>Steven, in all honesty, that's got to be the most compelling
>argument for turning our IPv6 support into a loadable module
>that I've heard to date.
>
I'm not sure how you mean that, but if you mean it's easier to do 
development and testing when it's a much shorter cycle I certainly 
agree.  Of course, I'm all for LKMs as well.

Off to class now, and just in time...

		--Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb