Re: [Fwd: (ngtrans) I-D ACTION:draft-many-ngtrans-connect-ipv6-igp-01.txt]

[Pekka Savola <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, 4 Mar 2002, Damien Galand wrote:
> --------------------------------------
> Abstract
> 
> This draft proposes a mechanism that allows an  incremental deployment
> of IPv6 inside an IPv4 AS. It aims at automatically set up tunnels,
> using IGP standard capabilities, in order to gradually introduce IPv6
> connectivity within an initially IPv4 AS. As specified in
> draft-ietf-ngtrans-introduction-to-ipv6-transition-07.txt, this
> technique must be considered as a solution with a scope of domain.

Why not ISATAP [or BGP-tunneling, sigh]?

Personally I really don't see why we need a lot of really specific
solutions when ones we already have provide almost everything anyone would
need.  Soon ngtrans will be a dump of everything fancy like some say MPLS
is. 

I think this kind of "micro-specifying" is just drawing the attention from
the really important issues, like getting on with the transition and
fixing (possible) issues in current transition toolbox.

Detailed comments to the draft later.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "Tell me of difficulties surmounted,
Netcore Oy                   not those you stumble over and fall"
Systems. Networks. Security.  -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords