On Jun 30, 2011, at 12:33 PM, Mark Townsley wrote: >>> >>> I think the consensus we had in the past BoFs and discussion in and around >>> this topic can be summed up as stating that homenet deliverables will: >>> >>> - coexist with (existing) IPv4 protocols, devices, applications, etc. >>> - operate in a (future) IPv6-only home network in the absence of IPv4 >>> - be IP-agnostic whenever possible >> >> I'd like for this group to relax the "wherever possible" bit, so as to not >> preclude solutions where IPv6 can do a better job than IPv4. > > Yes, and I think that IPv6 should naturally do a better job than IPv4 in the > cases where it can. > > My original mail had this restatement of the above, which I think gets closer > to what you want: > >>> However, when we can define something that is needed for IPv6 in a way that >>> is also useful for IPv4 without making significant concessions, we should >>> go ahead and do so.
when the group can define something that is useful in IPv6, it shouldn't matter whether it's also useful for IPv4. please don't constrain home networks to work only within the confines of IPv4 brain damage. Keith _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
