[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Comments on draft-wbeebee-ipv6-cpe-router-01.txt



On Tue, 15 Jul 2008, Hemant Singh (shemant) wrote:

<hs>
Yes, the OSI model says PHY needs to be independent of IPv6 and IPv4 at
layer 3. So are we on the same page that you and Antonio need only one
Ethernet physical WAN interface, but there may, of course, be any number
of logical interfaces bound to the physical Ethernet interface. Please
let's make sure, if anyone needs more than one physical port for the WAN
side of the CPE Router - please speak up if you do.
<hs>

If you're talking about an ethernet interface bridged to the WAN side, then I'd say it's highly recommended. If the device is an all-in-one integrated device and you have to test the provisioning of the service provider connection, it's easy to just have the customer move a PC temporarilly onto the extra WAN access port and troubleshoot from there. The only thing between the PC being used for diagnosis and the Service Provider is the internal modem. Furthermore, some customers may want to have a plug-n-play DMZ outside of their router firewall domain. For simplicity of managing policy, this latter scenario probably would imply that the /64 assigned to the WAN link shouldn't overlap with the prefix delegated to the LAN interface(s) of the router but even that's not necessarilly a hard requirement.

Antonio Querubin
whois:  AQ7-ARIN