Re: Enterprise Analysis DSTM Issue

[Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>]

On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 10:48:22PM -0400, Bound, Jim wrote:

> Regarding DSTM it does assume a dual stack on all nodes and states that
> clearly in the spec and supports IPv6 - in - IPv6 tunneling RFC should
> be used.  It is only the IPv4 routing within the DSTM domain that will
> not be used and this was an idea supported by the market and that is
> input at least to those of us that will drive and assist the market to
> use DSTM as an IPv6 Transiton mechanism.  To state DSTM does not support
> a dual-stack method is not valid based on the DSTM spec.

One option may be to title it 'Dual Stack (Host) Transition Mechanism' to
distinguish it from 'conventional' dual stack where dual stack on the
wire is used (and nodes may be v4 only, v6 only or both).

I think enough people know what DSTM is as to not change the acronym.

Tim