Re: [v6ops] Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-04.txt> (Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices) to Informational RFC

On 9/9/13 1:06 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> I have to agree with Lorenzo here again.
> 
> This document seems to me to be:
> 
> 1.Out of scope for the IETF.

AD here... let's put this one to bed. there are existance proof(s) of
previous work in this area and others that covers similar ground.

I don't believe that this is out of scope for the WG or the IETF,
Neither did the previous AD.

So... Focus on the contents.

> 2.So watered down in its language as to use many words to say nearly
> nothing.
> 3.Claims to be informational, but with so many caveats about the nature
> of that
> information that it's hard to imagine what meaningful information an
> independent
> reader could glean from the document.
> 
> Finally, given the spirited debate that has extended into this last call
> (which I honestly wonder
> how this ever saw last call over the sustained objections) definitely
> does not appear to have
> even rough consensus, nor does it appear to have running code.
> 
> Why is there such a push to do this?
> 
> Owen
> 
> On Sep 9, 2013, at 05:16 , <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
> <mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>> wrote:
> 
>> Re-,
>>  
>> Please see inline.
>>  
>> Cheers,
>> Med
>>  
>> *De :* Lorenzo Colitti [mailto:lorenzo@google.com <http://google.com/>] 
>> *Envoyé :* lundi 9 septembre 2013 13:24
>> *À :* BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN
>> *Cc :* Dave Cridland; v6ops@ietf.org <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org> WG; BINET
>> David IMT/OLN; IETF Discussion
>> *Objet :* Re: [v6ops] Last Call:
>> <draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-04.txt> (Internet Protocol
>> Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices) to Informational RFC
>>  
>> On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 8:06 PM, <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
>> <mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     The document explicitly says “This document is not a standard.”
>>     since version -00.
>>
>>      
>>
>>     What additional statement you would like to see added?
>>
>>  
>> I think the high-order points are:
>>  
>> 1. The text "This document defines an IPv6 profile for 3GPP mobile
>> devices. It lists the set of features a 3GPP mobile device is to be
>> compliant with to connect to an IPv6-only or dual-stack wireless
>> network" should be replaced with "This document defines an IPv6
>> profile for 3GPP mobile devices that a number of operators believe is
>> necessary to deploy IPv6 on an IPv6-only or dual-stack wireless
>> network (including 3GPP cellular network and IEEE 802.11 network)."
>>  
>> In place of "a number of operators believe is necessary to deploy" you
>> could have "intend to deploy" or "require". I'd guess that as long as
>> it's clear that the requirements don't come from the IETF but from a
>> number of operators (not all of them, or a majority of them), it
>> doesn't matter exactly what you say.
>> */[Med] I made this change:/*
>> */ /*
>> */OLD:/*
>> */ /*
>>    This document defines an IPv6 profile for 3GPP mobile devices.  It
>>    lists the set of features a 3GPP mobile device is to be compliant
>>    with to connect to an IPv6-only or dual-stack wireless network
>>    (including 3GPP cellular network and IEEE 802.11 network).
>> */ /*
>> */New:/*
>> */ /*
>>    This document defines an IPv6 profile that a number of operators
>>    require in order to connect 3GPP mobile devices to an IPv6-only or
>>    dual-stack wireless network (including 3GPP cellular network and IEEE
>>    802.11 network).
>> */
>>
>> /*
>> 2. In the normative language section, I'd like to see a statement
>> similar to what's in RFC 6092. Perhaps something like this?
>> */[Med] I used the same wording as in RFC6092. The change is as follows:/*
>> */ /*
>> */OLD:/*
>> */ /*
>>    This document is not a standard.  It uses the normative keywords only
>>    for precision.
>> */ /*
>> */NEW:/*
>> */ /*
>>       NOTE WELL: This document is not a standard, and conformance with
>>       it is not required in order to claim conformance with IETF
>>       standards for IPv6.  It uses the normative keywords defined in the
>>       previous section only for precision.
>> */ /*
>> _______________________________________________
>> v6ops mailing list
>> v6ops@ietf.org <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
> 