Subject: Node Requirements Issue 9

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 14:25:21 +0200

Hi all,

9) Are Transition mechanisms mandatory; is support for IPv4 mandatory?

I think that IPv4 is not mandatory, but a strong SHOULD.  If IPv4
is supported, then some sort of transition mechanism is madatory - 
anyone have suggestions on what should be mandatory?  Text suggestions
are helpful.

John

--------------------------------------------------------------------
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-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 08:53:04 +0200

Hi Keith,

> > I don't know if we want to say that IPv6 nodes SHOULD implement
> > IPv4...  However, I do think it makes sense to have a section
> > that includes additional requirements (if any) for dual-stack
> > nodes.
> 
> I agree both that IPv6 nodes should probably not be required in any
> sense to implement IPv4, and also that it makes sense to ask whether
> there are any additional requirements for dual-stack hosts.
> 
> Actually it might be worthwhile to consider three categories
> 
> - native IPv6 only
> - native IPv6 with IPv4 supported only via tunneling over IPv6
> - native IPv6 and native IPv4 both fully supported

Good point.  I will try to capture this in the document.

John