Re: [dhcwg] WGLC on draft-ietf-dhc-v4configuration-04 - respond by Jan. 31

Qi Sun <sunqi.csnet.thu@gmail.com> Fri, 31 January 2014 12:48 UTC

Return-Path: <sunqi.csnet.thu@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC6CC1A057F for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 04:48:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nxpH61UP3IFT for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 04:48:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pb0-x22d.google.com (mail-pb0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::22d]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C86A51A057C for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 04:48:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pb0-f45.google.com with SMTP id un15so4376349pbc.32 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 04:48:18 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=UBZMu843+tUnTOrYQ7okfkH8zEz8qOq2KJ+wUInBwNk=; b=FjVaR3PRaEeFhbLVaVT/Yix4K8ZU2vF5AjW6Qv7NhB6ZWBofEgJolSaIdjER+wNNne pCIZB34E/ILEsF4rjyi6EqS/TZoQS3xsvX/MweZzIrSgB7ucQraKJrcto576hKizKvON DsaMfBUBwynMTFvgowzgSGT4QL2C7HAtfR4x6kjIXDb7ikuSSw9Vm+KaYCQ8pxkWmEu4 1AlkAaxrQQs2FB7murBfkaKDRA0si3UuG/mY1ogPVVcNTTtaiKum9eewOCFUZXNU3+Tu mDkM+5kn3EoXyiIDLwMyEWY9RjcGNqakUTHsKeYucLvykK2BPFaDCEk6ho1/J6aZV+86 5scg==
X-Received: by 10.66.163.2 with SMTP id ye2mr20402447pab.110.1391172498363; Fri, 31 Jan 2014 04:48:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.0.109] ([27.213.251.185]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id cz3sm27356310pbc.9.2014.01.31.04.48.15 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 31 Jan 2014 04:48:17 -0800 (PST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
From: Qi Sun <sunqi.csnet.thu@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <52D9A59D.4080100@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 20:48:17 +0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <9CA18722-D532-47DF-A88E-496ABF41E1A8@gmail.com>
References: <52D87808.8040107@gmail.com> <52D9A59D.4080100@gmail.com>
To: DHC WG <dhcwg@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085)
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] WGLC on draft-ietf-dhc-v4configuration-04 - respond by Jan. 31
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dhcwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 12:48:23 -0000

Dear all,

I support this document to move forward.


Best Regards,
Qi 


On 2014-1-18, at 上午5:50, Tomek Mrugalski wrote:

> Folks,
> 
> Authors and chairs feel that draft-ietf-dhc-v4configuration-04
> (http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dhc-v4configuration/) is
> ready for WGLC. Please post your comment by end of January.
> 
> If you support this draft moving forward, please say so. If you object
> this draft moving forward, please explain your concerns. Please limit
> your posts to technical comments and skip your personal preferences. "I
> like the other solution better" is not a technical comment.
> 
> Please note that:
> - Softwires WG is expecting an answer from DHC WG on how to configure
> IPv4 devices in IPv6-only networks. We should answer that question.
> 
> - There is a temptation to sneak in certain A+P pieces here. We must not
> do that. This is related, but a different problem. Let's solve one issue
> at a time.
> 
> - -04 features an update that is a result of some off the list
> discussions. In essence, the addition is "if possible, use native DHCPv4
> without modifications. If not, here's what DHC recommends:
> DHCPv4-over-DHCPv6".
> 
> With my DHC chair hat off, I'd like to ask you to do your best to not
> reopen the discussion of solution X being marginally better over Y in
> scenario Z. Yes, we can keep coming up with new metrics that would prove
> whatever metric inventor wants to prove. But that will lead us nowhere.
> There is probably no single solution that will be the best in every
> possible deployment scenario. We discussed that for over a year (much
> more if you take into account Softwire discussions). It's a high time to
> wrap things up here and move on.
> 
> Bernie & Tomek
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg