[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

some more help (fwd)

These questions were posed to the IPv6 Forum, but I wanted to forward, as
this arena may be optimal for Operations Experience. Please feel free to
write to the original author directly. ([email protected]) 

Rob Rockell
Sprintlink Internet Service Center
Operations Engineering
1-800-724-3329, PIN 385-8833
Ines|e gnyne qh vagr bz s|e Ino ngg una {e hgr bpu plxyne?

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 20:55:32 +0100
From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[email protected]>
To: IPv6 Deployment List <[email protected]>, [email protected],
    [email protected]
Subject: some more help

>From the answers I got as response to my last email, I will like somebody taking a few minutes to describe the following problems:

- Multi-homing problem. What's the problem (from the user point of view), and what alternatives we have to solve it ?
- Is fixed length addressing the right approach ? why yes or why not ? Alternatives ?
- DHCPv6 according to the IETF DHCP WG (not for the IPng WG). What's the problem ?
- Use of scopes for unicast IPv6 addresses as far as nailing down how they are used and deployed. What this will mean ?
- Still need to deploy and test IPv6 Multicast protocols. It means that Multicast protocol isn't tested enough ?

I hope some of you can take a few minutes to describe your point of view on these issues, or provide me some direct links that already talk on these ...

I will like to finish this work before end of this week, so I can present the document on the next Berlin GIS.

Please copy to anybody that do you think can give a good think and isn't in these list ...

Thanks and best regards,

Jordi Palet

Tel: 91 858 75 09 - Fax: 91 858 76 31