Re: registering tunnel types

Are:
-IPv6 in UDPv4 and
-IPv6 in IPv6 as used by openvpn;

covered by the list below?

These are a few tunnelling mechanisms I use routinely.

Existing identity 6tofour should be deprecated, if that means 6to4, 
which is deprecated.

Existing identity iphttps has a version number for IP?

Alex

Le 24/10/2018 à 17:57, tom petch a écrit :
> draft-ietf-softwire-yang
> completed IETF Last Call two weeks ago and, since then, has acquired a
> YANG module that defines tunnel types, as listed below.  It is intended
> to be a IANA-maintained module and so changes to the list of tunnels
> will not require a reissue of the softwires RFC-to-be.  At the same
> time, getting it right first time never did any harm so if anyone can
> think of any missing, or can think of other places where there might be
> other tunnels lurking, now would be a good time to mention it.
> 
> It is based on RFC4087 Tunnel MIB (which created an SMI Textual
> Convention that went up to Teredo) so tunnels from that vintage are
> likely well catered for.  softwires is not where I would have first
> looked for tunnel types, but it has a certain logic to it.
> 
>       identity  other
> 
>       identity direct
> 
>       identity gre
> 
>       identity minimal
> 
>       identity l2tp
> 
>       identity pptp
> 
>       identity l2f
> 
>       identity udp
> 
>       identity atmp
> 
>       identity msdp
> 
>       identity sixtofour
> 
>       identity sixoverfour
> 
>       identity isatap
> 
>       identity teredo
> 
>       identity iphttps
> 
>       identity softwiremesh
> 
>       identity dslite
> 
>       identity  aplusp
> 
> Tom Petch
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 