Re: Mutli6 meeting in Vienna

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

Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
...
> > 1) An unmodified implementation continues working, and receives at
> > least
> > the same quality of service as if the local site was not multi-homed,
> > or
> > the correspondent node was not multi-homed.
> 
> Supporting single homed correspondents is essential but I don't care
> much for single homed hosts in a multihomed site. Upgrade already. It's
> not like there is a huge installed base of stuff that isn't supported
> any more in IPv6.

Well, pretty much every operating system image shipped today includes
RFC 2460 support. So I suspect the installed (but not enabled) base
is in fact huge. At least in a large corporate network, routers and
hosts are *not* upgraded in a coordinated way. So 'upgrade already'
won't fly. We need incremental deployment; that has always been the
guiding principle for IPv6 coexistence.

   Brian