[16NG] Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-16ng-ipv6-over-ipv6cs (IPv6 Over the IP Specific part of the Packet Convergence sublayer in 802.16 Networks) to Proposed Standard

Basavaraj Patil writes:
> The 802.16 group in IEEE made such a choice and design. So I really do not
> know the reasoning why this mechanism was chosen. I don't know if it makes
> sense to document here the reasons why IPv4 and IPv6 CS' are segregated,
> because it is more of an L2 issue and this document is only specifying
> operation over what has been defined at L2.

OK; knowing that the higher level classification is forced here is
enough.

> > In that case, my concern would be for interoperability.  Having three
> > or four ways to do something is much worse than having one.
> 
> This has been raised as a concern previously as well (I believe there was a
> draft by Bernard Aboba expressing concerns about this as well). At the
> present time however IP CS is the default mode/CS for transporting IP and as
> such is being built in base stations and hosts. GPCS is not complete yet.

I see.  It sounds to me like some sort of warning might be warranted.
The point of IETF documents is to achieve interoperability, and if we
know in advance that this could be problematic, I think we should
mention that.  In other words, include GPCS as a possible future
consideration, alongside the separate Ethernet and VLAN CSes.

-- 
James Carlson, Solaris Networking              <james.d.carlson@sun.com>
Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive         71.232W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.496N   Fax +1 781 442 1677

_______________________________________________
16NG mailing list
16NG@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/16ng