Re: new draft on IPv6 CPE router available for review

[Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>]

On Fri, 4 Jul 2008, EricLKlein@softhome.net wrote:

> 2. If so for all IPv6 end devices or just CPE routers that have other 
> devices aggregated to them via copper, fiber, wireless?
My requirement is only for home gateway devices, I don't want to change 
the behaviour of end-hosts. My proposal is also to not remove any 
functionality or limit it, just to add. I am not aware of my proposal 
being in violation of any current wording in any document, but if it is, I 
volunteer to participate in work in getting it fixed.
> 3. What about other devices that act as a router but are the actual end-use 
> device? Do we ignore them, create a diffrent RFC and then reference it?
I would say this is still a router, and it needs to choose a globally 
reachable PD-IP (either a LAN interface or a loopback interface) to use 
for communication with the outside world.
> 4. Is there a consensus that these are worth the WG taking up and dealing 
> with?
I believe there are at least two people who have chimed in saying that 
they think this is a good idea, plus the authors of the draft also stated 
that they were willing to bring in wording to allow for it.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se