Re: [RAM] Ivip (was ViP ...)

[jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)]

    > From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com>

    >> SHIM6 is clearly not the portability and multihoming system most
    >> end-users want, so on its own, it has not been enough to make people
    >> want to adopt IPv6 without PI address space.

    > I suggest we don't have that conversation. I could write a long rant in
    > response - but it seems much more constructive to talk about routing
    > and addressing here

Indeed...

    > shim6 is an orthogonal discussion, and I believe we should just let the
    > WG finish its job.

I basically agree; but he does have a point, that many (most?) of the users
are not happy with the broad direction of the SHIM6 solution... which is a
problem for all of us, because the technical reasons why we went that way are
significant.

A architectural-level discussion of why people are unhappy with SHIM6, and
how that relates to those inescapable technical drivers, might not be out of
place here...

	Noel

_______________________________________________
RAM mailing list
RAM at iab.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ram