RE: charter

[Jim.Bound@nokia.com]

I agree we that. Only concern is that we just need to think long term on
IPv6. For example a Table Search entry address is 4 times as large.  For
implementors that increase could be enough for me to change my RIB and FIB
algorithms and if I want to keep my customers queues, et al balanced I may
need a different algorithm to do that.
I am sure this stuff affects the operators in strange ways too.  Thats all.
Just need to keep an eye out for strangeness we may not have seen with IPv4.
But I agree folks like you, Sean, and others clearly have been running large
networks for years and that experience is like major applicable, my mail was
not to detract from that applicability, but rather to just state we "may"
have some new unknowns here.

/jim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Randy Bush [mailto:randy@psg.com]
> Sent: Friday,February 16,2001 2:04 PM
> To: Jim.Bound@nokia.com
> Cc: rja@extremenetworks.com; multi6@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: RE: charter
> 
> 
> > I thought about it and this work should focus predominantly 
> on the IPv6
> > multihoming problem.  
> 
> that is the goal, hence the name.  but it is probably not 
> wise to pretend
> we have no experience with anything like this before in our history.
> 
> randy
>