RE: new draft on IPv6 in Broadband Networks

[John Kaippallimalil <jkaippal@huawei.com>]

Chip,
 I agree that this draft focuses on the point-to-point model in section
7.2.1 of RFC4779 with respect to addressing.  There are a few more details
in this draft  especially with regard to the routed model with DHCP-PD and
bridged model which we think is necessary for nomadic clients. 

As Frank mentions, we would like to draw on the expertise in v6ops to see if
the recommendations we make regarding IPv6 are sound. 

Best Regards,
John


-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Xia [mailto:xiayangsong@huawei.com] 
Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 12:34 PM
To: Chip Popoviciu (cpopovic); v6ops@ops.ietf.org
Cc: John Kaippallimalil
Subject: Re: new draft on IPv6 in Broadband Networks

Hi Chip 

As a co-author, I would like to share my idea before John's reply.

IPv6 deployment is currently one of main topics in DSL forum.
There are many arguments when applying IPv6 to DSL networks, even though
IETF has multiple documents regarding IPv6 deployment.

IMHO, there are two reasons for the disagreement:
1)Lacking communication between the two SDOs.
2)Generality of these documents resulting in ambiguity.

This draft is trying to bridge the two SDOs,  and provide enough detail for
DSL deployment.

Please see my other inline reply...

BR
Frank

----- Original Message -----
From: "Chip Popoviciu (cpopovic)" <cpopovic@cisco.com>
To: "John Kaippallimalil" <jkaippal@huawei.com>; <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 10:56 AM
Subject: RE: new draft on IPv6 in Broadband Networks



John,

This is a well written document. It seems to me that this document
describes in great detail the deployment options summarized in Section
7.2.1 of RFC 4779 (which does covers not only DSL but also Cable and
Ethernet as well)? In writing RFC 4779, we started with the same level
of detail however, the WG thought and we agreed that it was too much
information, especially considering the many types of environments and
deployment options covered. The reader should be able to identify the
details based on the deployment guidelines. 
Frank=>Unfortunately, there is no unanimous in DSL forum.

If however we think that is
not the case, then a detailed description such as the one in your
document might be valuable. In that case, this might open the door for
similar documents covering each of the other leading broadband access
environments. 
Frank=>IMHO, it is better to have such kind of documents.
3GPP/WiMAX  have already had the corresponding documents.

Besides the detailed description of the proposals in RFC
4779, does this document bring something conceptually new in terms of
deployment options for this access environment? 
Frank=>RFC4779 mainly focuses on ATM  DSL architecture, while this
draft is about Ethernet which is now popular.  We introduce 
point-to-point and shared link model which are not new in IETF.

Best Regards,
Chip 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org] On
Behalf Of John Kaippallimalil
Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 10:44 AM
To: v6ops@ops.ietf.org
Subject: new draft on IPv6 in Broadband Networks

v6ops folks,

Please review this draft:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-kaippallimalil-v6ops-ipv6-bbne
t-00
.txt

The abstract of the draft is snipped below:

Abstract
This document describes IPv6 link models and their applicability in a
fixed broadband network architecture.  This document also specifies the
addressing and operation of IPv6 in broadband networks.  The scope of
this specification is limited to the operation of IPv6 in a broadband
architecture.  This includes the IPv6 link model, address configuration,
router and neighbor discovery in broadband architecture.

Thanks,
John & Frank