RE: ocean: do not boil

[Margaret Wasserman <mrw@windriver.com>]

Hi Tony,

> The most obvious case at the moment is the substantial deployment of
> IPv4-only NAT CPE that for financial reasons *will not be upgraded*
> until the ISP is ready to provide native IPv6 support (in North America
> that is looking like ~2006, or in the case of docsis devices much
> later). For those end sites that want to move sooner, and don't have a
> reasonable option for an alternate ISP, just saying we only support dual
> stack is telling them they can't use IPv6 capable apps & appliances for
> at least 5 years.
I'm not sure how this follows from Randy's comments...

If a node in the end site wants to access an IPv6-only service, the user
would need to install IPv6 on that node (or buy a new appliance with
IPv6 included, etc.).  If the IPv6 infrastructure isn't present to route
IPv6 natively, then they might use one of our several tunneling mechanisms
to tunnel the packet over the IPv4 infrastructure to an IPv6 network.

> Also, as a meta point, declaring an approach for transition out of scope
> before the scenario documents are done is just a bit short sighted.
I actually think that we were discussing some prioritization of the
scenarios, not declaring any of the solutions in or out of scope.

Once we have a full set of scenarios, I think it will make sense to
try to trim down the set of scenarios, based on what we think is most
likely to occur.

Margaret