re: [RRG] What does incremental deployment mean

[Xu Xiaohu <xuxh@huawei.com>]

> I don't think this is true at all; at least it better not
> be. AFAICT, IPv6 as EID and IPv4 as RLOC is our best path
> toward an IPv6 Internet.

In the above approach, IPv6 should also play the role of locator in site
networks which implies that the site network should support IPv6. 

Have most of the site networks been ready for IPv6?  Is it easy to upgrade
the routers in all the site networks to support IPv6? If the answers to the
above questions are "No", How about using IPv4(globally unique)+IPv4(locally
unique) or LD ID/AS num + IPv4(locally unique) as locator whereas using IPv6
just as identifier?

Best wishes,
Xiaohu XU

> fred.l.templin@boeing.com
> 
> >
> >> > End of story.
> >> >
> >> > (For one, earler versions of Windows don't use/support Windows
> >> > Update, and a
> >> > lot of people have it turned off anyway, from paranoia/prudence/
> >> > whatever. But
> >> > just in general, there's a lot of old stuff out there, not just
> >> > Windows.)
> >>
> >> Even if everyone had Windows Update enabled, it would take
> >too long to
> >> get every system upgraded.
> >
> >Most of today's core routers have already been able to support
> >more than 1
> >million routing entries, is there enough incentive for the carriers to
> >deploy map&encap scheme within a short period.
> >
> >Should we take a survey to reach an agreement on when the new
> >address and
> >routing scheme should be deployed?
> >
> >> The most popular network-based application is your favorite browser.
> >> How many of them are not on the latest rev?
> >>
> >> Upgrading roughly 2 to 4 CE routers at every site on the
> >Internet will
> >> happen in far less time than changing every host.
> >
> >The approach that map implemented by hosts and encapsulation
> >implemented by
> >ITRs is incremental deployable. If hosts have not been changed
> >to support
> >this capability, the ITR can implement the map and
> >encapsulation together.
> >The upgraded hosts will not suffer the initial packet
> >loss/latency pain. And
> >the ITR with upgraded site network doesn't need a cache.
> >
> >Best wishes,
> >Xiaohu XU
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.com with the
> >word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
> >archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg
> >



--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg