Re: note from the iesg plenary

[Jim Bound <seamus@bit-net.com>]

Hi Peter,

> On Thu, 9 Aug 2001, Jim Bound wrote:
> 
> > Routing does not but the end node could.  Routing would be transparent to
> > the solution.
> > 
> > I think the best multi6 proposal would be one that can start alleviating
> > the pain of multihoming in v6 while we work the routing issues in general
> > in the IETF.  Also this will help as IPv6 deployment is eminant and will
> > not wait for us to finish.  By defining a mechanism like SCTP and use of
> > proper scoping with address selection much of the multihome problem can be
> > solved using the ideas from ohta-san, peter tatam et al and we can get
> > this in our IPv6 production code bases by late 2002 or early 2003.
> > Possbily earlier with code patches with a shim I suggested to Brian on
> > other mail thread.  Do not assume the market will wait or can be held up
> > at least in Asia and Europe, and now even certain target markets will
> > begin early adoption in the U.S. and have already although in test phase
> > now.
> 
> Are multihoming issues likely to bite any current rollout taking place? If so,
> there will need to be a temporary workaround in the contingency plan, with a
> strict stipulation that such a workaround has a limited lifetime.  If not, no
> need to worry.
> 
Not for current IPv6 deployment which is for others:
1. Core IPv6 Specs (Base, ND, ICMP, PMTUD, Base API, et al)
2. Core Trans Mech (Base Trans Mech, init 6to4, et al)
3. Core Internet Apps (telnet and friends, netutilities, send-mail, nfs,
et al).

So what we see are first IPv6/IPv4 nodes are deployed in
departments/labs/et al.  THen tunnels are used to connect across IPv4
ocean.

To keep it short initial deployment will not be seen by ISPs et al hence
no IPv6 routing table issues which is why deployment has started and
continue and because it will start in Intranets to the Edge and tunnel
across the core we have time.  Two variable where IPv6 could show up at
the core are 802.11b and 3G wireless.  But in these cases it will probably
not use the traditional Internet still as this will be done by the telco
providers not the standard ISPs.  It will take them time to see any IPv6
routing pain as they will use the Internet also as IPv4 ocean to tunnel
across. 

Now if someone causes a market of 3 billion IPv6 handhelds well then
everything breaks clearly.  I don't see that happening at least for two
years but it could.  

Sorry for the diatribe but I wanted to be clear by what I mean IPv6
deployment.  I am not speaking of native IPv6 packets across the core
backbone of the Internet.  I guess it could happen in Asia and Europe and
if that happens I fear they will build their own Internet and bypass the
U.S. issues I guess ???

As far as product rollout if sctp as one example was used it would adhere
to the current multi6 reqs and work with non Ipv6 multihomed nodes or non
ipv4 multihomed nodes for transition.

My vision of shim to support AF_SCTP (for V6) also would adhere to multi6
req above.  

Plus once we see this is something we want to experiment with we add that
specific test to UNH, ETSI, and Kame Test Suites for IPv6.  Most all IPv6
is tested at interop events before we move to production mode.

So I think we are OK but the code always is the final truth.

/jim