RE: proposed text for charter

[<john.loughney@nokia.com>]

Jari,

I can live with your proposed text, I'll suggest some wordsmithing in a few
places, if folks are roughly supportive of this text.

John

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-shim6@psg.com [mailto:owner-shim6@psg.com]On Behalf Of ext
> Jari Arkko
> Sent: 22 March, 2005 17:22
> To: shim6
> Subject: proposed text for charter
> 
> 
> 
> Here's some suggested text for the shim6 charter that attempts
> to make it clearer what problem the group solves and what
> constraints are placed on the solution:
> 
> OLD:
> 
> The shim6 WG is to produce specifications for an IPv6 site-multihoming
> solution based on the architecture developed by the IETF multi6
> WG. The multi6 WG was tasked with investigating solutions to the site
> multihoming problem that will allow the global routing system to
> scale. The outcome of the multi6 WG is a specific network-layer shim
> architecture for addressing and address handling of sites and
> nodes. This includes switching to different locator addresses when
> connectivity changes, but without the changes of address being visible
> to upper layers, which see a fixed Upper Layer Identifier address
> (ULID).
> 
> The shim6 WG is to complete this work with the required protocol
> developments
> and complete the architecture and security analysis of the required
> protocols.
> 
> NEW:
> 
> The shim6 WG is to produce specifications for an IPv6 site-multihoming
> solution based on the architecture developed by the IETF multi6
> WG. An earlier multi6 WG was tasked with investigating 
> solutions to the site
> multihoming problem. The outcome of the multi6 WG was a specific
> network-layer shim architecture for addressing and address handling of
> sites and nodes.
> 
> The multihoming problem consists of the ability of sites or nodes to
> be connected to multiple IP service providers for the purposes of
> redundancy, load sharing, policy or cost reasons. The scope of the
> shim6 WG is to develop a solution which is characterized by the
> following constraints:
> 
> o  The solution will allow the global routing system to 
> scale. That is,
>    re-homing events and the structure of the multihomed connectivity
>    should not be visible to the routing system. As a result, 
> the solution
>    consists of the ability to switch to different locator 
> addresses when
>    connectivity changes.
> 
> o  Provider-assigned addresses are expected to be necessary, rather
>    than on relying solely on provider-independent addresses.  
> 
> o  Changes in the locator addresses will be invisible to upper layers,
>    which see a fixed Upper Layer Identifier address (ULID).
> 
> o  ULIDs are actual IP addresses such that existing applications can
>    continue to work unchanged, and that application referrals work.
> 
> o  The solution does not cause problems for mobility. That is, it
>    should be possible to continue using Mobile IPv6 even when using
>    shim6 simultaneously. However, any optimizations or advanced
>    configurations are out of scope for shim6.
> 
>     Similarly, while it is desirable that the basic building blocks of
>     shim6 be able to handle dynamic changes in the addresses,
>     the focus of the group is not in the development of a new
>     mobility solution.
> 
> o  The solution should assume ingress filtering may be applied.
> 
> o  Only IPv6 is considered.
> 
> o  No address translation is considered.
> 
> The shim6 WG is to complete the required protocol developments and the
> architecture and security analysis of the required protocols.
> 
> 
>