I see
> -----Original Message----- > From: Sheng Yang [mailto:sh...@yasker.org] > Sent: Friday, January 18, 2013 12:17 PM > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] IPv6 support draft functional spec(phase 1) > > On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Anthony Xu <xuefei...@citrix.com> > wrote: > > Dual stack in user VM or router VM? > > router VM must have dual stack because link-local is still ipv4, > right? > > Dual-stack is one interface has both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses. > > If there is dual-stack, it must be at both user VM and router VM, at > public interface. > > Link-local interface of router is still there even it's IPv6 only on > public interface. > > --Sheng > > > > > > Anthony > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Sheng Yang [mailto:sh...@yasker.org] > >> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2013 11:13 AM > >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] IPv6 support draft functional spec(phase 1) > >> > >> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 7:05 PM, Chiradeep Vittal > >> <chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote: > >> > The spec calls for dualstack, so ipv4 would still work? > >> > >> I think it would be stage 2 of phase 1, after ipv6 stack only. > >> > >> --Sheng > >> > > >> > On 1/17/13 3:49 PM, "Sheng Yang" <sh...@yasker.org> wrote: > >> > > >> >>On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Alex Huang <alex.hu...@citrix.com> > >> wrote: > >> >>>> We just want to make thing as simple as possible for the phase > 1. > >> The > >> >>>> service other than DNS/DHCP would be supported later, and > depends > >> on > >> >>>> how much time we have. > >> >>>> > >> >>> > >> >>> How do you present something like this to the end user if it > works > >> one > >> >>>way and not another. It needs to be consistent. > >> >>> > >> >>Let's get the DNS/DHCP part done first... > >> >> > >> >>--Sheng > >> >
