Subject: (ngtrans) call for Orlando IETF agenda items

From: Bob Fink <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 07:22:17 -0800

We are now planning for the Orlando IETF meetings, so I need input on topics anyone might wish to cover at the ngtrans meeting.

Please send your agenda suggestions either to me privately or to the ngtrans list.

Thanks,

Bob

---

From: Hossam Afifi <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 16:43:02 +0100

Bob:
 we intend to send a draft on another solution to transition v6<>v4 by means
 of the DNS, called dynamic tunnelling with Laurent Toutain . However it
 is not yet ready.

Hossam

---

From: Bob Fink <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 09:28:21 -0800

Rob,

At 12:13 PM 10/30/98 -0500, Robert Rockell wrote:
>I think it is time for some sort of reccommended filter policy to be
>discussed, as most people out there (some of which who perform bad-route
>reports, yet don't filter their downstreams) are not using filters in place.
>For instance, I make the bad routing report every day in Merit's report, but
>my AS never shows up in the route's originating path). 
>I don't know if this should be added to the soon-to-be-expired
>draft-ietf-ngtrans-6bone-routing-01.tx paper, or put somewhere else, but I
>think it is time that this is more strictly enforced.
>
>Filtering via route-map on cisco products works well, but I don't know that
>it is widely implemented (Backbone experience, or other reasons). 
>
>If we are going to model the 6bone after real life, I think that this is
>going to be a crucial issue (especially if we are going to tackle the
>multi-homing problem; without filters, no one is encouraged to work on it,
>as both /48's are wandering around the backbone for a downstream in many
>instances...)

I will happily add this to the agenda, and would very much like it discussed.  I would apreciate it if you would present your ideas and background of your point of view in a short (5-10 minute) presentation.

Thanks,

Bob

---

From: Robert Rockell <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 12:13:32 -0500 (EST)

Just opinions.

Thanks
Rob Rockell
Sprintlink Internet Service Center
Operations Engineering
703-689-6322
1-800-724-3329, PIN 385-8833

On Fri, 30 Oct 1998, Bob Fink wrote:

->We are now planning for the Orlando IETF meetings, so I need input on topics anyone might wish to cover at the ngtrans meeting.
->
->Please send your agenda suggestions either to me privately or to the ngtrans list.
->
->
->Thanks,
->
->Bob
->

---

From: Bob Fink <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 13:25:44 -0800

At 04:00 PM 10/30/98 -0500, Robert Rockell wrote:
>Sure. I can do that. Let me know what timeslot I am in.

Great, you are on the agenda.

Bob

===
>->Rob,
>->At 12:13 PM 10/30/98 -0500, Robert Rockell wrote:
>->>I think it is time for some sort of reccommended filter policy to be
>->>discussed, as most people out there (some of which who perform bad-route
>->>reports, yet don't filter their downstreams) are not using filters in place.
>->>For instance, I make the bad routing report every day in Merit's report, but
>->>my AS never shows up in the route's originating path). 
>->>I don't know if this should be added to the soon-to-be-expired
>->>draft-ietf-ngtrans-6bone-routing-01.tx paper, or put somewhere else, but I
>->>think it is time that this is more strictly enforced.
>->>
>->>Filtering via route-map on cisco products works well, but I don't know that
>->>it is widely implemented (Backbone experience, or other reasons). 
>->>
>->>If we are going to model the 6bone after real life, I think that this is
>->>going to be a crucial issue (especially if we are going to tackle the
>->>multi-homing problem; without filters, no one is encouraged to work on it,
>->>as both /48's are wandering around the backbone for a downstream in many
>->>instances...)
>->
>->I will happily add this to the agenda, and would very much like it 
>discussed.  I would apreciate it if you would present your ideas and 
>background of your point of view in a short (5-10 minute) presentation.
>->
>->
>->Thanks,
>->
>->Bob
>->