RE: comments on the requirements draft

["Michel Py" <michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us>]

>>>> Eliot Lear wrote:
>>>> Sections 3.2.2 and 3.2.3 presume a real installed base.
>>>> There is none.
>> Brian E Carpenter wrote
>> No, they recognise the existence of a significant number of
>> implementations. I work with development managers for host
>> stacks, and I guarantee you they are not about to start over
>> - multihoming has to be an add-on, if you want it to happen.
>> I presume the same is true of router code.

There is even more constraints on routers / switches since some
of them have might hardware tailored for IPv6 already, or in an
advanced design phase. If a multi6 implementation was to require
changes to be made to the IPv6 header and especially to the
address fields, it would certainly encounter a lot of resistance,
to say the least.

>> To me these are absolutely key requirements if you want multi6
>> to have any impact on the real world.
>> Brian

I agree with Brian here.
Michel.