• All Internet connected hosts must be IPv10 hosts to be able to communicate regardless the used IP version, and the IPv10 deployment process can be accomplished by ALL technology companies developing OSs for hosts networking and security devices.

4. There is no need to think about migration as both IPv4 and IPv6 hosts can coexist and communicate to each other which will allow the usage of the address space of both IPv4 and IPv6 making the available number of connected hosts be bigger.

I do not understand how the condition “all internet connected hosts must be IPv10” merits “there is no need to think about migration”. Maybe I am missing something, but I see nothing about a mechanism for IPv10 hosts to communicate with networks still running IPv6 or IPv4 stacks. The adoption hurdle seems to be only slightly lowered.

[EDIT] It seems the IETF mailing list already raised a lot of counter points to this “proposal” https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/8iP1ALT1rMJhlNjCrLARh7uoGk8

It’s as if, 15 years later, somebody started listening to djb.

Seen on HN, here’s another IETF draft submitted by this author:

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-omar-si-00

[Satellite Internet] works by using a space network of satellites that surrounds the whole earth, connected to each others using fiber optic cables

IPv6 is so 1998!

Seems like they should call this ipv12 (gcm of 6 and 4).