[ipv6-wg] New version (or followup) of RIPE-501 document...
Jan Zorz @ go6.si jan at go6.si
Mon Jul 18 10:13:34 CEST 2011
On 7/16/11 8:40 PM, Ivan Pepelnjak wrote: > I would say LB MUST conform to "host" spec. Those load balancers that > provide routing functionality MUST conform to "router" specs. Well, we can take the spec of host and tweak it - as by definition that we use "A host is a network participant that sends and receives packets but does not forward them on behalf of others." LB can't be just host :) Now we just need to see which routing protocols are commonly used in load balancers and what requirements to get from Router spec section. > >> We could put all *NAT* and L4+ stuff in optional requirements. >> Probably the goal is to describe IPv6 load balancer, that would >> work in IPv6 only environment and IPv6 only clients and servers. Am >> I wrong? > > Load balancing between IPv6 clients and IPv6 and IPv4 servers (6-to-6 > and 6-to-4) is a short-term MUST. 4-to-6 is a longer-term SHOULD. Maybe we can write this requirements as wording, not as RFC pointer... > > Mixed v4/v6 servers behind the same outside virtual IPv6 address is a > SHOULD. > > Support for X-forwarded-for (or equivalent) header in HTTP is a MUST > (otherwise the servers lose any visibility into who the client is). this is also non-RFC requirement... Let's see what I can do. /jan
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]