RE: [ipv6-dir] FW: ITU-T Q.9/13 IPv6 concerns

That makes sense, Allison.  I agree that those particular issues are not
IPv6-specific.

Margaret

-----Original Message-----
From: Allison Mankin [mailto:mankin@psg.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2005 11:10 AM
To: Margaret Wasserman
Cc: ipv6-dir@ietf.org; sbrim@cisco.com
Subject: Re: [ipv6-dir] FW: ITU-T Q.9/13 IPv6 concerns 

Margaret,

On these:

> - QoS signaling.  They want to be sure that they can efficiently use
>   both the the transport signaling protocols (such as RSVP and NSIS)
>   and the application signaling protocols (such as SIP) in an IPv6
>   environment.  Relevant RFCs/drafts are those about how those
>   protocols work over IPv6.
> 
> - QoS signaling interworking, IPv4<->IPv6.

If what they want to do with signaling is efficient, they
should not be hindered by IPv6 or IPv4<->IPv6 questions...

RSVP, NSIS and SIPPING have relevant points in RFCs and/or drafts.  My 
thought is that John Loughney to prepare a lightly annotated list
for RSVP/NSIS and and the editor of the SIP-related v6 work,
Vijay Gurbani to do the same for that.  And have NSIS and SIPPING
take a look for transparency before it goes over to ITU.

Allison

_______________________________________________
ipv6-dir mailing list
ipv6-dir@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-dir