I have read the above documents and have some general comments and then some more nit like comments. General comments: ----------------- In general it might be good with a document outlining some basic checklists to determine the level of IPv6 readiness in a service provider. However, I doubt the value of listing some of the current programs and what methodology they are currently using. These change, and keeping the document uptodate so it's meaningful might be hard and of little value. Also, there are some existing discussion on how to track IPv6 deployment - some of this was discussed at the RIPE meeting in Prague http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-60/presentations/Aben-IPv6_at_web_clients_and_caching_resolvers.pdf and from what I understand similar discussions where held at the Google IPv6 day. Now, that type of measurement is not the same type of checklist / certification program as the I-D describes, but this brings me to what I believe is the biggest flaw of section 3 - it doesn't say much about actual deployment. Rather, the barrier is very low. For example in 3.3 it mentions an allocated or PI block. If this is for an ISP, a PI block is useless as the intention of PI is to not suballocate. I would set the requirement to PA bock only. Further - I believe the Basic class described in 3.3 should at least require sub-allocations of IPV6 prefixes, otherwise it's hard to argue that an ISP has 'deployed' IPv6. As for the Advance class in 3.4, I would suggest that an ISP provides more than basic services (i.e DNS) over IPv6 to end-users and/or the Internet in general. Still, while I am somewhat agreeing with a standardized measurement of IPv6 readiness in an AS/ISP I think that it's more useful to work on measuring actually deployed clients that can be observed and publishing that data. Even better would be standardized quality measures of these deployments. There are many drawbacks on doing this based on only observed data at a server side ala looking at a web-server, but as Lorenzo and Google have shown in many presentations, at least it gives data to do a risk assessment for a service operator. If this document could combine some level of Basic recommendations along the lines of "Have PA, hvae done X sub-delegations, provides Y services" together with a standard collection mechanism/schema (perhaps that is really a different document) similar to what RIPE does, what Google does, or even better- a format or method that would allow sharing of data, content/service operators could build a matrix and we could see the progress and quality of IPv6 deployment. I know that several content providers have been thinking of how they could best measure IPv6 deployment effects on their services, and I am sure there is a lot of thinking out there that might be worth tapping into. Nits: ----- Fist of all there are quite a few abbreviations that are not expanded when first used, like LIR. Secondly, the two paragraphs : > 1. Introduction > > > There are many web sites that give listings of IPv6 enabled service > providers, or rate ISPs according to their IPv6 enabledness. The > following are few examples of currently known programs. > > IPv6 Enabled Program > http://ipv6forum.org/ipv6_enabled/ > > > IPv6 Ripeness > http://labs.ripe.net/content/ipv6-ripeness/ > > > SixXS > http://www.sixxs.net/wiki/IPv6_Enabled_Service_Providers > > > IPv6 to Standard > http://ipv6-to-standard.org/ > > > Hurricane Electric Free IPv6 Certification > > http://ipv6.he.net/certification/ ...and.... > > 2. Summary of the Current Situation > > > The following are the list of currently known programs that list or > rate ISPs according to a guideline that each has determined. > > > IPv6 Enabled Program > http://ipv6forum.org/ipv6_enabled/ > > > IPv6 Ripeness > http://labs.ripe.net/content/ipv6-ripeness/ > > > SixXS > http://www.sixxs.net/wiki/IPv6_Enabled_Service_Providers > > > IPv6 to Standard > http://ipv6-to-standard.org/ > > > Hurricane Electric Free IPv6 Certification > > http://ipv6.he.net/certification/ > > > note: the following description of each program is not yet complete. are repetitions that doesn't really add to the document. Best regards, - kurtis -
Attachment:
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part