Re: [Dime] Rechartering:draft-sarikaya-dimeradext-prefix-auth-ps-00.txt

Hi Julien

IMO, If you are arguing the necessity of the IP renumbering,
I think we can stop discussing on the topic of lifetime of prefix,
because we have fundamental disagreement on this
issue.

BR
Frank

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Julien Bournelle" <julien.bournelle@gmail.com>
To: "Frank Xia" <xiayangsong@huawei.com>
Cc: <dime@ietf.org>; "Behcet Sarikaya" <sarikaya@ieee.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 1:08 PM
Subject: Re: [Dime] 
Rechartering:draft-sarikaya-dimeradext-prefix-auth-ps-00.txt

> Hi Frank,
>
> I think we are little bit looping since I have the impression that we
> already had this discussion. However, see my reply inline.
>
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Frank Xia <xiayangsong@huawei.com> wrote:
>> Hi Julien
>>
>> Let talk about a  specific issue which is dealt with in the draft.
>>
>> Current prefix definition RFC4005 has no lifetime which
>> is necessary for IPv6 renumbering.
>> There is the same issue with RADIUS (RFC4818).
>
> Maybe the reason is that the lifetime of the prefix is implicit and
> is the same as the lifetime of the network access authorization.
> I may be wrong but I don't see why we would do "hard" renumbering.
> I mean that if we want to do renumbering there will be a transition period
> during which the obsolete and the new prefix will be in place.
>
> Do you have a specific deployment scenarios in mind ?
>
> Regards,
>
> Julien
>
>
>>
>> BR
>> Frank
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Julien Bournelle"
>> <julien.bournelle@gmail.com>
>> To: "Behcet Sarikaya" <sarikaya@ieee.org>
>> Cc: <dime@ietf.org>
>> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 3:20 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Dime]
>> Rechartering:draft-sarikaya-dimeradext-prefix-auth-ps-00.txt
>>
>>
>>> Hi behcet,
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 5:15 PM, Behcet Sarikaya
>>> <behcetsarikaya@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Julien,
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>> From: Julien Bournelle <julien.bournelle@gmail.com>
>>>> To: Hannes Tschofenig <Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net>
>>>> Cc: dime@ietf.org
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 3:14:15 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: [Dime] Rechartering:
>>>> draft-sarikaya-dimeradext-prefix-auth-ps-00.txt
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 8:29 PM, Hannes Tschofenig
>>>> <Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Document:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-sarikaya-dimeradext-prefix-auth-ps-00.txt
>>>>>
>>>>> * Who is able to be editor of the document?
>>>>>
>>>>> * Who is interested to help the editor with the work on the draft by
>>>>> co-authoring it?
>>>>>
>>>>> * Who is able to provide reviews?
>>>>>
>>>>> * Who is unable to actively help with a specific document but supports
>>>>> the
>>>>> work?
>>>>>
>>>>> * Are there concerns regarding this document?
>>>>
>>>> As I said previously in the ML. I'm not convinced by this I-D. 
>>>> Basically
>>>> I don't see the need for a specific Diameter Application for Prefix
>>>> Delegation.
>>>>
>>>> [behcet] The new draft is about Prefix Authorization. Prefix
>>>> Authorization
>>>> is well within AAA domain capabilities. Are you saying no to this?
>>>
>>> I don't want to reenter in this discussion since we already did it :)
>>>
>>> I'm not convinced by your Problem Statement. We are already able to
>>> deliver Prefix during network access AAA (e.g. NASREQ or EAP Diameter
>>> Application). And I may be wrong but I don't see the need for a specific
>>> application for this.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Julien
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Behcet
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> DiME mailing list
>>> DiME@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime
>>>
>>
>>
>>
> 

_______________________________________________
DiME mailing list
DiME@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime