RE: WGLC: draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-simple-security-10.txt

["Laganier, Julien" <julienl@qualcomm.com>]

Mohacsi Janos wrote:
>
> Laganier, Julien wrote:
> > 
> > I believe we should cover MIPv6 adequately in this specification by
> > adding explicit tracking of outbound initiated MIPv6 HoA/RH2
> degenerated
> > tunnels.
> >
> > [ The MEXT WG has two documents specifying firewall behavior for
> > MIPv6 that could be used as a starting point for text to be included
> > in this spec -- see
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mext-firewall-vendor-02 and
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mext-firewall-admin-02 ]
> >
> > What do people think?
> 
> Is it still applies to "CPE simple security"?  In my opinion, vendor
> might decide implement these additional settings...

I do not think that recommending that a typical off-the-shelf IPv6 CPE breaks MIPv6 is an option...

--julien