1 ipv6-node-02.PPT/ 18 November 2002 / John Loughney IETF 55 IPv6 Working Group IPv6 Node Requirements draft-ietf-ipv6-node-requirements-02.txt John Loughney.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Recommendations for IPv6 in 3GPP Standards draft-wasserman-3gpp-advice-00.txt IPv6-3GPP Design Team Salt Lake City IETF December 2001.
Advertisements

Transitioning to IPv6 April 15,2005 Presented By: Richard Moore PBS Enterprise Technology.
Auto Configuration and Mobility Options in IPv6 By: Hitu Malhotra and Sue Scheckermann.
1 IPv6. 2 Problem: 32-bit address space will be completely allocated by Solution: Design a new IP with a larger address space, called the IP version.
IPv6 Victor T. Norman.
Mobile IPv6 趨勢介紹 1. Mobile IP and its Variants Mobile IPv4 (MIPv4) – MIPv4 – Low-Latency Handover for MIPv4 (FMIPv4) – Regional Registration for MIPv4.
1 Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) What the caterpillar calls the end of the world, nature calls a butterfly. - Anonymous.
Network Layer IPv6 Slides were original prepared by Dr. Tatsuya Suda.
IP Version 6 Next generation IP Prof. P Venkataram ECE Dept. IISc.
2: Comparing IPv4 and IPv6 Rick Graziani Cabrillo College
Network Localized Mobility Management using DHCP
IETF 651 Issues With Protocols Proposing Multilink Subnets draft-thaler-intarea-multilink-subnet-issues-00.txt Dave Thaler
IP Version 6 (IPv6) Dr. Adil Yousif. Why IPv6?  Deficiency of IPv4  Address space exhaustion  New types of service  Integration  Multicast  Quality.
Network Layer: IPv6 IS250 Spring 2010
1IETF59 DNSOP WG IPv6 DNS Discovery Issues Jaehoon Paul Jeong ETRI 1st March th IETF – Seoul,
TDC 375 Winter 2002John Kristoff1 Network Protocols IPv6.
Guide to TCP/IP Fourth Edition
IETF 80: NETEXT Working Group – Logical Interface Support for IP Hosts 1 Logical Interface Support for IP Hosts Sri Gundavelli Telemaco Melia Carlos Jesus.
1 DNSOPS / Vienna IETF / July 2003 / Bob Hinden IPv6 DNS Discovery, and why it is important Bob Hinden.
CS 6401 IPv6 Outline Background Structure Deployment.
Mobility Complexity IP4 and IP6. IP4 Mobility Static device talks to home agent Bidirectional tunnel to mobile device –Else ingress filtering problem.
بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم. Why ip V6 ip V4 Addressing Ip v4 :: 32-bits :: :: written in dotted decimal :: :: ::
Group Management n Introduction n Internet Group Management Protocol (IGMP) n Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) protocol.
CSIS 4823 Data Communications Networking – IPv6
Slide 1, Dr. Wolfgang Böhm, Mobile Internet, © Siemens AG 2001 Dr. Wolfgang Böhm Siemens AG, Mobile Internet Dr. Wolfgang.
Introduction to IPv6 NSS Wing,BSNL Mobile Services, Ernakulam 1.
Heidelberg, May 1998 AIMS’99 Workshop Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) Úna Logan Broadcom Eireann Research Ltd.
Summary of Certification Process (part 1). IPv6 Client IPv6 packets inside IPv4 packets.
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.Cisco Public BSCI Module 8 Lessons 1 and 2 1 BSCI Module 8 Lessons 1 and 2 Introducing IPv6 and Defining.
1 /160 © NOKIA 2001 MobileIPv6_Workshop2001.PPT / / Tutorial Mobile IPv6 Kan Zhigang Nokia Research Center Beijing, P.R.China
Brett Neely IP Next Generation. To boldly go where no network has gone before...
IPv6 WORKING GROUP (IPNGWG) March 2001 Minneapolis IETF Bob Hinden / Nokia Steve Deering / Cisco Systems Co-Chairs.
IPv6 Document Status and Action Plan Margaret Wasserman IETF56 San Francisco March 2003.
CS 6401 IPv6 Outline Background Structure Deployment.
IPv6 WORKING GROUP December 2001 Salt Lake City IETF Bob Hinden / Nokia Steve Deering / Cisco Systems Co-Chairs.
IPv6 WORKING GROUP July 2002 Yokohama IETF Bob Hinden / Nokia Steve Deering / Cisco Systems Margaret Wasserman / Wind River Co-Chairs.
IPv6 WORKING GROUP March 2002 Minneapolis IETF Bob Hinden / Nokia Steve Deering / Cisco Systems Co-Chairs.
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. BSCI v3.0—8-1 Implementing IPv6 Implementing Dynamic IPv6 Addresses.
1 Evaluation of PMIPv6 Base Multicast Support Drafts Stig Venaas Behcet Sarikaya November 2009 Multimob WG IETF 76.
IPv6 Working Group IETF58 Minneapolis November 2003 Bob Hinden & Brian Haberman Chairs.
IPv6 Site-Local Discussion Bob Hinden & Margaret Wasserman IETF 56 San Francisco March 2003.
Introduction to Mobile IPv6
IPv6 WORKING GROUP (IPv6 a.k.a. IPNGWG) August 2001 London IETF Bob Hinden / Nokia Steve Deering / Cisco Systems Co-Chairs.
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.Cisco Public BSCI Module 8 Lesson 3 1 BSCI Module 8 Lesson 3 Implementing Dynamic IPv6 Addresses.
V6OPS WG – IETF #85 IPv6 for 3GPP Cellular Hosts draft-korhonen-v6ops-rfc3316bis-00 Jouni Korhonen, Jari Arkko, Teemu Savolainen, Suresh Krishnan.
IPv 邱文揚 Joseph 李家福 Frank. Introduction The scale of IPv4 Internet has become far larger than one could ever imagine when designing.
IPv6 WORKING GROUP (IPNGWG) December 2000 San Diego IETF Bob Hinden / Nokia Steve Deering / Cisco Systems Co-Chairs.
PIM Extension For Tunnel Based Multicast Fast Reroute (TMFRR) draft-lwei-pim-tmfrr-00 IETF 76, Hiroshima.
1 Computer Networks IPv6. 2 Motivation The primary motivation from changing the IP datagram format is to increase the size of the useable address space.
1 ipv6-node-02.PPT/ 18 November 2002 / John Loughney IETF 55 IPv6 Working Group IPv6 Node Requirements draft-ietf-ipv6-node-requirements-02.txt John Loughney.
Default Address Selection for IPv6 Richard Draves May 31, 2001 Redmond Interim IPv6 WG Meeting draft-ietf-ipngwg-default-addr-select-04.
IPv6 (Internet Protocol V. 6)
IPv6 Neighbor Discovery over Syam Madanapalli Samsung ISO IETF 64 – Vancouver, Canada November 8 th 2005.
IETF-53-IPv6 WG- Cellular host draft 1 Minimum IPv6 Functionality for a Cellular Host Jari Arkko Peter Hedman Gerben Kuijpers Hesham Soliman John Loughney.
Per-MS Prefix Model for IPv6 in WiMAX by Frank Xia Behcet Sarikaya Raj Patil Presented by Jonne Soininen.
1 cellhost-ipv6-52.ppt/ December 13, 2001 / John A. Loughney Minimum IPv6 Functionality for a Cellular Host John Loughney, Pertti Suomela, Juha Wiljakka,
IETF 80: NETEXT Working Group – Logical Interface Support for IP Hosts 1 Logical Interface Support for IP Hosts Telemaco Melia, Sri Gundavelli, Carlos.
IETF-70 in Vancouver1 STANDARDIZATION OF SOLUTIONS Behcet Sarikaya Huawei Research.
1 Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Special Topics in Computer Sciences Second Term 1433/1434 H Dr. Loai Bani Melhim.
IPv6 Working Group IETF55 Atlanta November URL for Thermometer
IPv6 over ’s IPv6 Convergence Sublayer IPv6 over ’s IPv6 Convergence Sublayer draft-madanapalli-ipv6-over ipv6cs-00 Syam Madanapalli.
Moving IPv6 Documents to Draft Standard IETF 53 Minneapolis, MN March 18th, 2002.
Booting up on the Home Link
IPv6 Outline Background Structure Deployment Fall 2001 CS 640.
Syam Madanapalli Basavaraj Patil Erik Nordmark JinHyeock Choi
Next Generation: Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) RFC 2460
IETF 55 IPv6 Working Group IPv6 Node Requirements
IETF57 Vienna July 2003 Bob Hinden & Margaret Wasserman Chairs
Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6)
IPv6 Outline Background Structure Deployment CS 640.
Presentation transcript:

1 ipv6-node-02.PPT/ 18 November 2002 / John Loughney IETF 55 IPv6 Working Group IPv6 Node Requirements draft-ietf-ipv6-node-requirements-02.txt John Loughney

2 ipv6-node-02.PPT/ 18 November 2002 / John Loughney Major Changes Some formatting stuff. Requirements language. Removal of many ‘IP over x’ documents. Many of the MIPv6 requirements.

3 ipv6-node-02.PPT/ 18 November 2002 / John Loughney Requirement Language MUST... (always mandatory) MUST... when X (mandatory under condition X) SHOULD... (always highly recommended) SHOULD... when X (highly recommended when X, possible otherwise) MAY... (possible if you want to do it) However, we should discuss if this is a Standards Track or Informational document.

4 ipv6-node-02.PPT/ 18 November 2002 / John Loughney RFC Path MTU Discovery … Path MTU is MAY. Some folks have commented that it needs to be SHOULD. Comment: ’We really shouldn't be encouraging the idea that it's an option except in very restricted circumstances.’

5 ipv6-node-02.PPT/ 18 November 2002 / John Loughney RFC Privacy Extensions …. Do we want to discuss in what circumstances Privacy Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in IPv6 are needed? hosts servers mobile nodes other

6 ipv6-node-02.PPT/ 18 November 2002 / John Loughney MLD Change: Multicast Listener Discovery [RFC-2710] MUST be supported by nodes supporting multicast applications. A primary IPv6 multicast application is Neighbor Discovery (all those solicited-node mcast addresses must be joined). To: Multicast Listener Discovery [RFC-2710] MUST be supported by nodes supporting multicast applications or Neighbor Discovery. Change: When MLDv2 [MLDv2] has been completed, it SHOULD take precedence over MLD. To Nodes supporting source-specific multicast applications MUST support MLDv2.

7 ipv6-node-02.PPT/ 18 November 2002 / John Loughney Default Address Selection for IPv6 Change: The rules specified in the document are the only MUST to implement portion of the architecture. A node MUST belong to one site. There is no requirement that a node be able to belong to more than one. To: The rules specified in the document are the only MUST to implement portion of the architecture. There is no requirement that a node be able to belong to more than one site.

8 ipv6-node-02.PPT/ 18 November 2002 / John Loughney IPv4 Support IPv6 nodes MAY support IPv4. However, this document should consider the following cases: Native IPv6 only Native IPv6 with IPv4 supported only via tunneling over IPv6 Native IPv6 and native IPv4 both fully supported. Need to sort out if this places any requirements on this.

9 ipv6-node-02.PPT/ 18 November 2002 / John Loughney Mobile IP Mobile Node functionality MAY be supported. Route Optimization functionality SHOULD be supported for hosts. Route Optimization is not required for routers. Remove Home Agent functionality text.

10 ipv6-node-02.PPT/ 18 November 2002 / John Loughney MIBs What do we want to do here? Only IP level MIBs SHOULD or MUST be supported. Forwarding table MIB IP MIB Interfaces MIB Others may be supported as needed. If you implement another protocol, then you SHOULD or MUST implement the MIB. You MUST implement if you have an SNMP agent. RFC 1112 says nothing about MIBs.

11 ipv6-node-02.PPT/ 18 November 2002 / John Loughney Other Remove section on RFC DNS Extensions to Support IPv6 Address Aggregation and Renumbering

12 ipv6-node-02.PPT/ 18 November 2002 / John Loughney Discussions to Capture (at some point) Flow Label DNS discovery SeND WG issues ANYCAST