Subject: (ngtrans) Next steps

From: "Tony Hain" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 15:53:56 -0800

The discussion in the wg meeting on Monday focused on the charter
update, and the need to clearly identify viable operational environments
at different phases of the transition to IPv6. To accomplish that the wg
will need to establish concise descriptions of each target environment,
then show how at least one set of tools can be applied to accomplish a
transition. In addition, if there are specific combinations of tools
which create security or other problems for a given environment, the wg
will need to highlight those issues.

To get this effort started and provide a discussion framework, the
co-chairs developed the following bullet points.

Vision of deployment and related issues in a small set of defined
environments.
Goals:
  provide network managers with at least one viable framework and
complete tool set 	for deploying IPv6.
  expose any mismatch between the requirements of a target environment
and the 	ngtrans tool set.

These goals should be self explanatory, but in case there is confusion,
we are not looking for all possible environments, or approaches to
deploy IPv6 in an environment. Since we will be describing common
generic cases, the approach chosen may not even necessarily the best
approach for any particular network. Rather the goal is to identify
consistent characteristics of the most common environments.

Environments:
   Unmanaged Network (SOHO lan)
   Managed Network (Enterprise lan & vpn)
   ISP service models
      Dial   :   HFC   :   DSL   :   FtoH   :   3G
   Services
      www, smtp, IM, ...

This is not intended to be an exhaustive list, rather an example of ways
to break down the 'network environment' into manageable size pieces. If
there are additional environments with wide applicability please raise
them to the list.

These documents need to describe existing operational environments with
their unique characteristics, independent of the IPv6 transition
approaches that might be applied. To the extent that major sections of
the descriptions are common, the result should be a single document,
while those cases where some parts are common, but the architectural
approaches vary widely, there should be multiple documents.

For example, deploying IPv6 in an HFC environment will probably be a
single document, even though some cable modems act as a bridge while
others act as routers. Outside of this difference, most of the
associated infrastructure is common across the majority of service
providers globally. On the other hand, we expect a 3G cell environment
will probably be described separately from a Dial environment. While
they may share a common authentication system, it is likely they have
little else in common.

Areas to cover:
   How to get started
   Mixed mode operation
   Viability & path of removing IPv4
   Manageability
   Security concerns
   Applications and their infrastructure
   Broad common issues may be in separate docs
   ISP architecture issues include
      aaa, prefix allocation, dns registration, tunnel services, .

Once the environment is well described, independent of transition
technologies, there will need to be one or more documents describing the
possible application of a set of transition tools, and any issues that
arise over time. In particular the periods of initial IPv6 use, a 50%
mixed mode, and phasing out of IPv4 will need to be explicitly
addressed. If there are other notable combinations for any given
environment, those are expected to be highlighted as well. In addition
to the basic description of how a set of tools might be used, there will
need to be a discussion of manageability, security issues, application
impact, and any services expectations at each of the phases.

Until those documents are available, the IESG has no context to evaluate
the tools against. For this reason, there will be a hold placed on all
other ngtrans projects at least until IETF-54 in Yokohama. This means
that there will be no existing project work forwarded to the IESG, and
no new projects accepted. This does not mean that authors and wg
participants should stop work on these work items, rather that they will
be reviewed for appropriateness within the updated ngtrans charter.

The current proposed charter is:

The goals of the NGtrans working group is:
Document operational requirements and recommended practices for major
pieces of the Internet infrastructure in a mixed world of IPv4 only,
IPv6 only and dual stack nodes.  Those pieces include, but are not
limited to:  Routing, DNS, Mail, Network monitoring, Web, Multicast,
VoIP,...  This work is to be done in cooperation with the relevant
experts and/or the relevant working groups when applicable.

Any further work items to be evaluated between now and July

Please send comments about this charter to the list.

To get the necessary documents started, we first need to agree on the
breakdown of the environments. Please keep in mind we are looking for
the high-level environment, so with or without IPv4 nat should be a
subset of each environment. Send comments to the list, and we will last
call the set when it appears the discussion is converging.

After the breakdown is agreed upon, we will be looking for volunteers to
take the lead on specific documents. The target is to have some
draft-*-00 versions available for comment before the July submission
cut-off. After the WG agrees that the document adaquately describes a
generic target environment, work will begin on the description of how a
set of the ngtrans tools might apply.

The NGtrans co-chairs
Alain, Margaret, & Tony

---

From: "Liu, Changwen" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 17:25:03 -0800

Sorry for getting a couple of typos in the previous email. I mean in the
listed environments, you may have scenarios of v6 nodes roaming into v4
domain and v4 nodes roaming into v6 domain. So Mobility will be more than
just mixed mode operation and should be addressed separately. 

Regards,
changwen

-----Original Message-----
From: Liu, Changwen [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 5:19 PM
To: 'Tony Hain'
Cc: [email-masked]; Margaret Wasserman; Alain Durand; Bob
Fink; Randy Bush
Subject: RE: (ngtrans) Next steps

Tony,
	I believe Mobility should also be one important item in the "Areas
to cover". In the listed environments, you may have scenarios of v6 nodes
roaming into v6 domain and v4 nodes roaming into v4 domain. Mobility will be
more than just mixed mode operation and should be addressed separately.

Regards,
changwen

-----Original Message-----
From: Tony Hain [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 3:54 PM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: Margaret Wasserman; Alain Durand; Bob Fink; Randy Bush
Subject: (ngtrans) Next steps

Environments:

Areas to cover:
   How to get started
   Mixed mode operation

The NGtrans co-chairs
Alain, Margaret, & Tony