Folks, Now that draft-ietf-6man-addr-select-sol was approved as an 6man wg item, I'd like to start discussion about which one we should standardize.
The applicability comparison figure in section 4.1 shows that each mechanism has different applicability domain and the conclusion is that a right solution should be adopted in the right place. That doesn't mean we should standardize all the mechanisms described in this draft, but IMHO the best mechanism should be standardized if we are motivated enough to solve the address selection problems in one or multiple cases. When we looked at the above-mentioned figure, we know that shim6 is almost ready and shim6 is suitable for rather dynamically changing and unmanaged network. However, for enterprise/soho network and consumer network, we don't have a standardized way of solving address selection problems described in the problem statement draft. As I presented at Vancouver, ( http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/07dec/slides/6man-9.pdf : page4) one of our motivations is to replace a NAT-box aided IPv4 site that is attached to multiple disjoint network with an address selection mechiansim aided IPv6 network. In this case, the topology of the network is very static and hosts at the downstream of the NAT box is not always managed. >From our analysis, policy distribution method seems to best meet the requirements and, moreover, this was most discussed at v6ops and supported by many people. I remember dhc chairs are ready to welcome this proposal if this is accepted by ipv6 people. I'd like to have everyone's comments on moving this mechiansm forward to dhc working group. -- Arifumi Matsumoto IP Technology Expert Team Secure Communication Project NTT Information Sharing Platform Laboratories E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
