Re: I-D ACTION:draft-baker-v6ops-end2end-00.txt

[Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>]

On Thu, 25 Aug 2005, Elwyn Davies wrote:
> Hence before expending a lot of effort on determining (and 'marketing') 
> whatever might be the 'best' solution in the pure IPv4 core case I believe we 
> should get some idea of the relative importance of the pure IPv4 core case as 
> compared with IPv4 providing a tunnel substrate for connecting to the IPv6 
> transit backbone.

I had a little bit of the same concern.  It seemed as if document was 
discussing solutions for end-to-end IPv6 connectivity mechanisms 
between two or more v4 islands (or vice versa for v4 and v6 islands).

My take was similar to yours: we don't need end-to-end v6 connectivity 
*mechanisms* (provided by one site to another).  We'll just ask the 
sites to connect to the v6 internet.  They might do it via their 
direct upstream or someone else, but which one doesn't matter that 
much as long as the "v6 backbone" doesn't get fragmented.

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