IPv6

[Caren Litvanyi]

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004, Ivan R. Judson wrote:

> 
> Yeah, I meant a two phase approach at first:
> 1) IPv6 capability to the desktop (including but not limited to multicast)
> to get porting done

Ok, in the email to Bob I mention we can do this with an
isolated "sandbox" vlan.  However, this directly conflicts with
our relatively recent historical practice of separating your
offices into different routed vlans to improve mutlicast (v4)
performance.  So, we either need to abandon that practice,
(which I think is possible if you all stay connected to the
main divisional switch/router, not downstream switches) or
your 'desktop' boxes will need to be dual-homed onto the IPv6
sandbox vlan if that is where you are doing development.


> 2) IPv6 as a production capacity to the desktop (including but not limited
> to multicast)
> 
> We can probably satiate some fraction of the users with #1, and make the
> IPv6 people happy with it, but long term we are going to need #2 to be able
> to support it and fix bugs, etc.
> 
> It seems like we should be pricing forklifts, no?
> 
These are pretty scary numbers no matter how you slice it.

Thanks,
Caren