RIPng

[Steve Deering]

> If we are not going to do RIPng in 1 month then lets use Alain's scheme for 
> now at least for the star topology.  

Note that I was agreeing with Alain regarding the basic topology of this
stage of the 6bone, that is, a mesh of "backbone" or "core" routers, with
individual sites or sub-communities hung off that.  Any problem with
insufficient aggregation should only be in the backbone routers, since the
leaf sites or communities can just use default for all off-site or out-of-
community destinations.  There seems to be some disagreement on the severity
of the backbone problem, but if the folks managing those routers find it
too much of a burden, and can't solve it soon enough by getting RIPng
running, by all means let's aggregate routes as Alain suggested.  Though,
as Pedro pointed out, we don't need to change the addressing format for that.
To aggregate all the European sites, for example, just pick one of the
European AS numbers currently being used in the 6bone and get all European
sites to renumber their nodes under that one AS number -- they'll still
have the IPv4 prefix in there to ensure uniqueness.

> And I am listening more to people who are sending packets on the network
> and doing this real time than the theories to get this up and running.

Are you suggesting that I should shut up?

> And I have respect for those who were at the bake-off and ran real code
> under test with other implementations than those who did not.

Let's all try to maintain respect for each other, OK?  This whole enterprise
is fragile enough as it is without the stress of squabbling among ourselves.

Steve