RE: IAB last call... Re: [ipv6-dir] Re: Updated document

john.loughney@nokia.com Tue, 10 January 2006 17:25 UTC

Received: from localhost.cnri.reston.va.us ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EwNFS-0001Xh-Ui; Tue, 10 Jan 2006 12:25:30 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EwNFL-0001QB-23; Tue, 10 Jan 2006 12:25:30 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA23044; Tue, 10 Jan 2006 12:24:03 -0500 (EST)
From: john.loughney@nokia.com
Received: from mgw-ext01.nokia.com ([131.228.20.93]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EwNM5-0001WU-5f; Tue, 10 Jan 2006 12:32:21 -0500
Received: from esebh105.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh105.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.211]) by mgw-ext01.nokia.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id k0AHPBh6019962; Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:25:13 +0200
Received: from esebh102.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.138.183]) by esebh105.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:25:13 +0200
Received: from esebe100.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.138.118]) by esebh102.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:25:13 +0200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: IAB last call... Re: [ipv6-dir] Re: Updated document
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:25:12 +0200
Message-ID: <1AA39B75171A7144A73216AED1D7478D01869ADC@esebe100.NOE.Nokia.com>
Thread-Topic: IAB last call... Re: [ipv6-dir] Re: Updated document
Thread-Index: AcYV+osgQLM4IGzMRnKFiliFTT+7nAAEAyNQ
To: sbrim@cisco.com, brc@zurich.ibm.com
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Jan 2006 17:25:13.0077 (UTC) FILETIME=[D0892250:01C6160A]
X-Spam-Score: 0.4 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 769a46790fb42fbb0b0cc700c82f7081
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: narten@us.ibm.com, leslie@thinkingcat.com, iab@ietf.org, MRW@devicescape.com, sob@harvard.edu, ipv6-dir@ietf.org, kurtis@kurtis.pp.se
X-BeenThere: ipv6-dir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IPv6 Directorate <ipv6-dir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-dir>, <mailto:ipv6-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6-dir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-dir>, <mailto:ipv6-dir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ipv6-dir-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ipv6-dir-bounces@ietf.org

Fwiw, I'm happy to contribute towards any future discussions for this.

John 

-----Original Message-----
From: ext Scott W Brim [mailto:sbrim@cisco.com] 
Sent: 10 January, 2006 17:27
To: Brian E Carpenter
Cc: Kurt Erik Lindqvist; Thomas Narten; Loughney John
(Nokia-NRC/Helsinki); Leslie Daigle; IAB IAB; ipv6-dir@ietf.org;
Margaret Wasserman; Bradner Scott
Subject: Re: IAB last call... Re: [ipv6-dir] Re: Updated document

On 01/10/2006 04:40 AM, Brian E Carpenter allegedly wrote:
> I have no problems with this version. I don't understand the mindset 
> of the people asking the question well enough to judge whether it's 
> really on target. I wonder if we are missing some general 
> scene-setting at the beginning? Time is short to debate this, but it's

> possible we should say something like
> 
> We remind the NGN community that IPv6 is a relatively conservative 
> replacement for IPv4, intentionally with no revolutionary features, 
> and that it is intended to overcome the addressing limitations and 
> some specific omissions in IPv4 without in any way fundamentally 
> changing the nature of the Internet. As such, we see very limited risk

> and much to gain by unambiguous adoption of IPv6.
> 
> Or something.
> 
>   Brian

There's no question about adoption of IPv6.  They love it.  My
evaluation is that their mindset is more one of showing SG13 how well
IPv6 fits the NGN goals.  In order to do that better they (1) want a
roadmap from the IETF and (2) intend to bring some drafts in on
enhancements to "IPv6" (for a broad definition of the term) for the gaps
between NGN goals and IPv6 capabilities.  One of my intentions was to
encourage early review of their gap analyses and maybe show them that
IPv6 can already do what they want in some way.  That's why I was very
happy when Margaret suggested getting volunteer experts to help.  It
appears that they actually know a lot already, but could use a little
support from those who see the architectural vision.  Anyway, I hope
that after this meeting they will be able to send at least one of their
documents for review and response by ipv6dir.

swb

_______________________________________________
ipv6-dir mailing list
ipv6-dir@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-dir