Re: [v6ops] [sunset4] draft-anderson-siit-dc-00

Le 2012-12-23 à 18:16, joel jaeggli a écrit :

> 
> On 12/19/12 7:42 AM, Cameron Byrne wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Xing Li <xing@cernet.edu.cn> wrote:
>>> Hi, Tore and All,
>>> 
>>> Thanks for your interesting draft. I also noticed that you presented this
>>> concept in RIPE64
>>> https://ripe64.ripe.net/presentations/67-20120417-RIPE64-The_Case_for_IPv6_Only_Data_Centres.pdf
>>> Due to the deployment of VMs in the DC, the depletion of the IPv4 address is
>>> a big issue and your draft presents a solution. I would like to see the
>>> discussion of your draft in v6ops.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>> xing
>> +1, i have read the draft and i believe it is something we need to
>> work on.  More and more ipv6-only networks are popping up (TMO USA for
>> mobile, TerraStream at DT for fixed line, Red Pill in data center,
>> CERNET2 in backbone ...), and i believe Tore has outlined a sensible
>> path for achieving this in a data centers ...what's more... it is a
>> running code... errr.. network.
>> 
>> I urge the chairs for sunset4 and v6ops to make a call on which WG
>> should own it and then take on the task of stewarding it into a WG
>> document.  This draft is clearly about running an IPv6 network (so
>> v6ops), but the main feature is shutting off ipv4 (so sunset4)
> I do see operating v6 only networks as germain to v6ops. there is clearly an intersection with sunset4 or behave/softwire/et al on how legacy ipv4 needs are supported if at all.

right. but sunset4 may do protocol work.

Marc.

>> editorial comments sent directly to the author.
>> 
>> CB
>> _______________________________________________
>> sunset4 mailing list
>> sunset4@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sunset4 mailing list
> sunset4@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sunset4