RE: FW: 3gpp scenario 2

[<juha.wiljakka@nokia.com>]

Some more comments below:

-----Original Message-----
From: ext Pekka Savola [mailto:pekkas@netcore.fi]
Sent: 19 December, 2002 00:47

On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Karim El-Malki (EAB) wrote:

It also reads:

    Encapsulating node can be e.g. the GGSN or the edge router between
    the border of the operator's IPv6 network and the public Internet.

this makes it very apparent to me that main focus was tunneling in the 
internet -approach.

 JW: This is a thing I commented in my previous mail: we must more clearly separate those outside / inside operator's network cases in the next revision.

IMO there's something really wrong in the 3GPP operator's network if it
needs to have e.g. more than 10-15 isolated IPv6 islands there (~ reaching
one limit where in some cases configured tunneling could become more
difficult to maintain).

 JW: I also think that configured tunneling is fine when the number of tunnels can be kept limited. Around 10 configured tunnels may be sufficient for many 3GPP nws.

btw. the ridiculously long paragraph should be split in about 5.

 JW: Let's do that in January! I admit that the editor could click 'enter' more frequently...

BR,
	-Juha-