Re: comments on the requirements draft

[Brian E Carpenter <brian@hursley.ibm.com>]

Eliot,

In almost all cases I would agree with you. And it may well be
that 5 or 10 years from now, people will have got enough
revenue from IPv6, or will have such compelling customer input,
that they rewrite their stacks for multihoming. But in the 0 to 5
year timeframe, I don't expect stacks to get rewritten.

  Brian

Eliot Lear wrote:
> 
> Then you're being penni-wise and pound foolish.  If not deploying
> multihoming means we exceed Moore's law over some period of time, we're all
> in trouble.  Let's evaluate solutions based on their technical merit, and
> not on the amount of code that will need to be written.
> 
> Eliot
> 
> At 11:09 AM 12/20/2001 +0100, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> >Eliot Lear wrote:
> >...
> >
> > > Sections 3.2.2 and 3.2.3 presume a real installed base.  There is none.
> >
> >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.
> >
> >To me these are absolutely key requirements if you want multi6 to have
> >any impact on the real world.
> >
> >   Brian