Re: IPv6 Home Use to stimulate deployment over IPv4-NAT

[Margaret Wasserman <mrw@windriver.com>]

Hi Pekka,

> > A DHCPv4 extension would work, somethink like marc blanchet's TSP
> > protocol would work also. Maybe the first think to do is to work on some
> > requirements for such a protocol.
>
> Indeed, we have to get a better picture on what are the problems and
> non-problems.
>
> For example, DHCP extension works only in scenarios where you obtain the
> tunnel connectivity from your direct upstream ISP, the same one that
> provides IPv4 connectivity.
>
> In many cases, this is a non-problem: it is often the case that such
> IPv6-active ISP's could provide v6 access using different means already --
> no all though -- if the IPv6-conscious ISP just has to keep natting
> routers as CPE's and can't change them in the short term, this could still
> be valuable.
>
> So, we need to have a picture on the scenarios we're trying to address.
This is exactly the type of analysis that I would expect as
part of the unmanaged analysis document.  We have a scenario
that needs to be addressed, and we should now perform an
analysis of the possible solutions to address that scenario.

If you feel that there are scenarios missing from the unmanaged
scenario document, or if you feel that we need to add a bit
more detail to the existing scenarios (i.e. break out the cases
where an in-house NAT does/doesn't forward packets on port 41
for example), please provide that input as part of the last call
on the unmanaged scenarios document.

Thanks,
Margaret