[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Moving forward on Site-Local and Local Addressing



Given the requirements from edge network managers I have talked to, I would
prefer C, but could live with B. 

Tony

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ipng@sunroof.eng.sun.com 
> [mailto:owner-ipng@sunroof.eng.sun.com] On Behalf Of Bob Hinden
> Sent: Monday, August 04, 2003 11:07 AM
> To: ipng@sunroof.eng.sun.com
> Cc: hinden@iprg.nokia.com
> Subject: Moving forward on Site-Local and Local Addressing
> 
> 
> [IPv6 working group chair hat on]
> 
> I think the working group has been making good progress on replacing 
> site-local addresses and wanted to get feed back from the 
> working group on 
> how we should move forward.  This is not intended to directly 
> relate to the 
> ongoing appeal of the working groups decision to deprecate the usage 
> site-local addresses, but to get feedback on how to proceed.  
> I think it is 
> very important that we move forward on this issue and not 
> rehash what has 
> happened in the past.
> 
> We now have a combined local addressing requirements document 
> <draft-hain-templin-ipv6-limitedrange-00.txt>, a specific 
> alternative to 
> site-local addresses draft 
> <draft-hinden-ipv6-global-local-addr-02.txt> 
> (accepted as a working group item at the Vienna IETF), and 
> will soon have a 
> draft describing why site-local addresses are being 
> deprecated and doing 
> the formal deprecation (authors identified and outline 
> discussed at the 
> Vienna IETF).  Note that all of these documents will proceed 
> through the 
> normal working group and IETF processes of last calls and review.
> 
> I think legitimate questions have been raised about how the 
> working group 
> should go about deprecating site-local addresses given their 
> maturity in 
> the current specifications and use in deployed products.  
> Specifically 
> should they be deprecated independently from having an 
> alternative solution 
> available, at the same time an alternative is available, or 
> sometime after 
> an alternative is available.  A forth alternative is to not replace 
> site-local addresses in any form, but I think the working 
> group has made it 
> clear that this is not a reasonable alternative.
> 
> I would like to hear from the working group on how we should 
> proceed.  I 
> think the choices are:
> 
> A) Deprecate Site-Local addresses independently from having 
> an alternative 
> solution available.  This would mean that the working group 
> should treat 
> the deprecation, and requirements and solution documents 
> outlined above 
> independently from each other.  If there was no consensus on 
> an alternative 
> a replacement would not happen.
> 
> B) Deprecate Site-Local addresses at the same time as a alternative 
> solution is agreed to.  This would mean advancing both 
> documents at the 
> same time and making them include normative references to 
> each other to 
> insure that they were published at the same time.  This would 
> result in the 
> deprecation only happening if a consensus was reached on an 
> alternative.
> 
> C) Deprecate Site-Local addresses after an alternative is defined, 
> standardized, and in operational practice.  This would mean 
> not advancing a 
> deprecation document until there was operational evidence that the 
> alternative was working and shown to be an improvement over 
> Site-Local 
> addresses.
> 
> Note:  In the above choices "Deprecate Site-Local addresses" means 
> publishing an RFC that does the formal deprecation.
> 
> Please respond to the list with your preference, or if there is an 
> alternative approach that is an improvement from the ones I 
> outlined.  I 
> hope that many of you will respond.
> 
> Thanks,
> Bob
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
> IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
> FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
> Direct all administrative requests to majordomo@sunroof.eng.sun.com
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to majordomo@sunroof.eng.sun.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------