Brian, Agree. The entire issue of scoping will need to be added to the infrastructure for sure.
thanks /jim > -----Original Message----- > From: Brian Haberman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 8:22 AM > To: Bound, Jim > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; IPng List > Subject: Re: Dual stack routers > > > Jim, > I agree with your assessment. It is essentially the way I have > integrated IPv6 into an IPv4 system. One point to keep in mind though > is how to support site-scoped addresses in this model. The > route table > needs expansion in order to incorporate the zone IDs in the lookup. > > Regards, > Brian > > "Bound, Jim" wrote: > > > > Its really up to the engineering team for that > implementation. I would integrate v4 and v6 and duplicate as > little as possible. At least all data structures so the > algorithm for update/replace/delete was the same function > module and not duplicated once for tcp and once for udp and > yet again for SCTP. Then there is the emerging RDMA the > router might want to use for storage. Treating all addresses > as 16bytes (v4 and v6) works and will perform. Also all the > traffic shaping, classification, et al on hardware would make > the hardware engineers job a lot easier and thats a > performance win too to support both address types. > > > > regards, > > /jim > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Murugan KAT [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 2:15 AM > > > To: 'IPng List' > > > Subject: Dual stack routers > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Murugan KAT > > > Sent: Tuesday, 19 March 2002 12:07 AM > > > To: 'IPng List' > > > Subject: RE: Requirements for 'O' flag (was Re: IPv6 working group > > > agendafor Minneapolis IETF) > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > Regarding Dual Stack Router implementation should a > router maintain 2 > > > routing tables, one for V4 and other for V6. What about the > > > routing stacks? > > > Should there be 2 instances of a routing protocol (BGP, > OSPF etc.,) ? > > > > > > What is the general approach? > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > KAT > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List > > > IPng Home Page: > http://playground.sun.com/ipng > > > FTP archive: > ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng > > > Direct all administrative requests to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List > > > IPng Home Page: > http://playground.sun.com/ipng > > > FTP archive: > ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng > > > Direct all administrative requests to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List > > IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng > > FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng > > Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
