FYI. Regards, Thomas Trede -----Urspr|ngliche Nachricht----- Von: Jim Bound <bound@wasted.zk3.dec.com> An: ngtrans@sunroof.Eng.Sun.COM <ngtrans@sunroof.Eng.Sun.COM> Cc: bound@zk3.dec.com <bound@zk3.dec.com> Datum: Mittwoch, 20. Januar 1999 16:57 Betreff: (ngtrans) Grenoble Discussion - Proposals to assist "initial" transition of IPv6
Folks,
At the Grenoble Interim meeting it would be really great if during the ngtrans session if we could discuss the merits and differences between the initial set of proposals that would be useful to assist IPv6 deployment. In addition we should also discuss the implementation complexities for each of them. Also what common implementation problems to each of them face which are similar (e.g. DNS, Assignment of Addresses). The list below are the ones I would think are important for initial deployment and then I list the ones which may be needed later. We can debate the order but covering the first set would be a lot of work if folks want we can cover the second set at Minnieapolis.
draft-ietf-ngtrans-dti-00.txt (note this proposal contrasts and compares the others here in the draft and I think incorrectly but I will be sending my input on this to the list before Grenoble soon).
draft-ietf-ngtrans-natpt-04.txt
draft-ietf-ngtrans-siit-04.txt
draft-ietf-ngtrans-assgn-ipv4-addrs-01.txt
Could I ask for some volunteers to help lead with me such a discussion and if possible do some prepartory work with me offline?
The ones we need to do later are:
draft-ietf-ngtrans-dual-stack-hosts-00.txt
draft-ietf-ngtrans-ipv4-ipv6-xlator-00.txt
draft-ietf-ngtrans-translator-00.txt
thanks /jim