Re: DSTM

[Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>]

> In ISP and Enterprise scenarios where client/user has determined that
> IPv6 will be dominant routing deployed backbone and node protocol and
> reducing use of IPv4 applications except where it must be supported as
> legacy (e.g. port has not happened, or port planned later of app).

This seems to me to be something that won't be compelling scenario for
quite some time. In other words, not something we need to focus on in
the short term.

Let me repeat the question  I asked previously:

   Which of the scernarios that the WG has developed call for DSTM (or
   something like DSTM)?

One of the purposes of the scenario analysis was to understand which
transition mechanisms were really important so that we could focus on
them. Also, understanding which are the core pieces would help us
label the RFCs more appropriately (e.g., Standards track
vs. experimental).

> In addition the user/client does not want to use any protocol
> transition that requires architecturally defined prefix within the
> IPv6 network (e.g. 6to4, Teredo).

I don't understand this. What is the _technical_ requirement here?_

Thomas