Re: Comments on unmaneval-00

[Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>]

Chirayu,

Thanks for detailed comments.  These and a couple of others should 
help the unmanaged analysis to get updated and moving on track.  
Responding to one issue only:

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003, Chirayu Patel wrote:
> ,----[ text from unmaneval-00 ]
> |    During the transition phase from IPv4 to IPv6 there will be IPv4
> |    only, dual stack or IPv6 only nodes. In this document, we make the
> |    hypothesis that the IPv6 only nodes do not need to communicate with
> |    IPv4 only nodes; devices that want to communicate with both IPv4 and
> |    IPv6 nodes are expected to implement both IPv4 and IPv6, i.e. be
> |    dual stack.
> `----
> 
> I don't agree with such an hypothesis. As long as IPv6-only devices are
> not barred, it is just a matter of time when some IPv6 application proves
> to be too sexy (for IPv4-only devices) to resist.
> 
> From the perspective of this document, mechanisms that can be used to
> bridge IPv4-only and IPv6-only devices should be evaluated.
> 
> The same comment applies to the text in section 3.2.

This has been discussed in the past, and I believe should not be 
substantially changed.

The point is, if we don't require something like this, we'll end up in 
scenarios where you deploy NAT-PT or something similar internal to an 
unmanaged network.  Moreover, if there are some "too sexy" new IPv6 
applications aout there, I'd suppose they're ones that work even 
work through NAT or NAT-PT. And that's not something we'll want.

So, I think it's very reasonable to recommend deploying dual-stack at 
least as long as you don't have v4 nodes to talk to any more.

The other point here is that if some v6 app just proves too sexy to 
resist, such users/nodes will have an incentive to deploy v6 
themselves, not just translation -- and that's what we want.

Do you agree with this?

(If so, wordsmithing is obviously needed to get the message across 
properly.. could you try to reword it?)

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings