RE: WG Review: IPv6 Operations (v6ops)

[Margaret Wasserman <mrw@windriver.com>]

Hi Hesham,

Although I have been reading this thread closely, I'm not
quite sure what we're talking about here...

>=> Are ISPs also happy to setup there EGPs manually? 
>I don't understand why we should drop something that makes
>it either to setup tunnels instead of relying on manual
>configuration. Just because people do it manually 
>today is not enough to justify dropping it. If people
>did that a few years ago, DHCP would not have been developed :)

Are you talking about the BGP Tunneling specification?

Even if it were absolutely necessary to have some sort of BGP
extensions to make shared IPv4/IPv6 networks work (about which
there is apparently some disagreement), why would we want to
standardize BGP extensions in an OPS area WG, instead of doing
it within the WG responsible for BGP (the idr WG).

Based on the v6ops charter, the v6ops WG might identify a need in
this area, but then we would work within the idr WG to devise
an appropriate solution.

Margaret