Re: [fun] [homegate] HOMENET working group proposal

[Jari Arkko <[e-mail]>]

Fernando,

> My point was that, except for the mechanism for PD, I don't see a
> substantial difference here that would e.g. prevent this from being
> developed for IPv4 (in addition to IPv6). -- Yes, I know we need to
> deploy IPv6... but I don't think you can expect people to get rid of
> their *working* IPv4 devices... (i.e., not sure why any of this
> functionality should be v6-only)
>   

You have to separate IETF specifications and functionality of real-world 
products. Obviously everyone is going to have IPv4 based home networks 
for a long time.

But their architecture is largely done and cannot be easily affected. 
Vendors are now looking into adding IPv6 into their home routers and 
other devices. I want to be able to show them how to do it right. They 
can, of course, replicate everything exactly as in IPv4. Much of it is 
right, of course, but on some areas I think we can do better. This is 
why the working group should focus on IPv6. If the group is successful, 
IPv4 network design continues to be what it is, but our recommendations 
for the IPv6 network design are adopted by vendors' home devices.

Jari