[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: I-D Action:draft-donley-ipv6-cpe-rtr-use-cases-and-reqs-00.txt
- To: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
- Subject: Re: I-D Action:draft-donley-ipv6-cpe-rtr-use-cases-and-reqs-00.txt
- From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 17:15:07 +0100
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=IMh1YKhsl2GohLowyj61DG7mGLl7UpJzbwUQp0QUmOXZmgCDcefi69wrs5MzKo7i7Q yBvn+JJGnBrZYT0Dpb0gt1oy90KP8MlUa9qHoKLOHxE6s3dDFnPzF083VCbKFuIHp0AL GTsbWvyv5+e5n8NL0Wgz7+HgZK6MPNSvi3fho=
- In-reply-to: <20090702213001.B85343A68DA@core3.amsl.com>
- Organization: University of Auckland
- References: <20090702213001.B85343A68DA@core3.amsl.com>
- User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
I'm very curious why this draft doesn't refer to
draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router. We certainly don't
want two competing documents, so can the authors say how
they plan to approach this?
I'm also curious why RFC4864 isn't mentioned. That's not
normative, but I would expect any draft in this area to
at least mention the scenarios mentioned there.
> 7.3. Transition and Tunneling Mechanisms
>
> As networks transition from IPv4 to IPv6, transition mechanisms may
> be required to continue providing customers with Internet service.
> In the future, the CPE Router may need to support some of these
> transition mechanisms, such as softwire [I-D.ietf-softwire-hs-
> framework-l2tpv2], Dual Stack Lite [I-D.ietf-softwire-dual-stack-
> lite], or NAT64.
This seems like far too short a discussion and far too short a list.
The range of coexistence (not transition) solutions is much larger
and it's far from clear which ones will be widespread.
Brian
On 2009-07-02 22:30, Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote:
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
>
> Title : Use Cases and Requirements for an IPv6 CPE Router
> Author(s) : C. Donley, et al.
> Filename : draft-donley-ipv6-cpe-rtr-use-cases-and-reqs-00.txt
> Pages : 24
> Date : 2009-07-02
>
> This document captures use cases and associated requirements for an
> IPv6 Customer Premises Equipment (CPE) router. Specifically, the
> current version of this document focuses on the provisioning of an
> IPv6 CPE router and the provisioning of IPv6 Home Devices attached to
> it. It also addresses IPv6 traffic forwarding and IPv6 CPE Router
> security. This document also identifies areas for future
> consideration. These areas include prefix sub-delegation, IPv6
> multicast, transition and tunneling mechanisms, provisioning
> consistency between DHCPv4 and DHCPv6, and DNS support. This
> document does not address IPv4 use cases or requirements, as they are
> widely understood; however, it is expected that IPv6 CPE Routers will
> also support IPv4.
>
> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-donley-ipv6-cpe-rtr-use-cases-and-reqs-00.txt
>
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>
> Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
> implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
> Internet-Draft.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> I-D-Announce mailing list
> I-D-Announce@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
> Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
> or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt