[ipv6-wg] "Requirements For IPv6 in ICT Equipment" comment

On 5 Jan 2011, at 14:52, Jan Zorz @ go6.si wrote:

> On 5.1.11 15:38, Gunter Van de Velde (gvandeve) wrote:
>> I can only applaud the work that Jan and team has done with RIPE-501. It
>> is a good initiative and will help people
>> get the best bang for their bucks within Europe. (and yes... it makes
>> live a vendor slightly harder and in some
>> way easier as it helps us prioritize.
> 
> Thnx :)

Absolutely, it's a really useful text.  One of the IPv6 issues that has come up in the JANET community is how to obtain good independent advice on IPv6 requirements to include in procurements.    Those requirements are much broader than for other 'new' technologies, and both include 'like for like' features for IPv4/IPv6 and new IPv6-specific features.

> 
>> The recommendations in there are
>> already quite in sync with other certifications
>> for targeted 'very very' big vendor customers of vendors, so it is no
>> surprise). What we (me and Cisco) have been seeing is users
>> confused and ask for everything of RIPE-501, and that is an important
>> reality check.
> 
> True. We need to fix that.

Fair point - RIPE-501 has some excellent suggestions, pointers and info in it, and not everyone will want everything.   Though the primary audience is government and large enterprises.   Vendors can still continue to prioritise feature releases based on the NIST and IPv6 Ready initiatives.

>> 
>> What I would like to see in addition to the current RIPE-501, and I have
>> been discussing this thought process with Jan already 1-2-1
>> is to make the document slightly larger, and add focus for common user
>> scenario's... like NREN, University, small enterprise, medium
>> enterprise and big enterprise, and then also for ISP tier-1 -2 -3 ... I
>> am not sure he is convinced, however I hope he is :-)
> 
> This is getting complex. I am convinced we need to do that, but not sure how to do that in order not to confuse readers even harder.

Well, the flow export feature is just one that is likely to be desirable in large enterprise networks, and is certainly an issue I and others have raised when talking to vendor(s).   Of course it's just one feature, and not a make or break one :)  

> 
> What is crossing my mind in this moment is online web application, where you start with selecting "I would like to choose my role (NREN, Eneterprise, ISP, ...)" or "I would like to specify by equipment type".
> 
> ...
> 
> Would this ease the selection process? If we need selection process that complex, than paper is not the right media, but online app would be nice choice.

I think this would be a significant amount of work.   I suspect the better approach is for some volunteers in appropriate communities to take RIPE-501, advertise it to those communities, and provide some suggestions as to which requirements are priorities for that community, e.g. for campus enterprise networks.    There will, following the Option 1 model, be some (though not many) mandatory and optional features that have different priorities in that environment, or a small number of features that are missing and can be added.    RIPE-501 provides a very nice foundation for such guidance.    Whether vendors like what is in that guidance shouldn't really be a concern :)    

Tim
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/ipv6-wg/attachments/20110106/bd2741c5/attachment.html>