Re: Consensus call on adopting:draft-krishnan-6man-rs-mark-06.txt

[Suresh Krishnan <[e-mail]>]

Hi Hemant,

On 10-08-13 02:19 PM, Hemant Singh (shemant) wrote:
> During the IETF 78, I met Ashok S. Joshi from Alcatel-Lucent who
> appraised me of one key property of the DSL broadband network.  He said,
> our cheap DSL devices in the home have about 3-5% of the devices with
> duplicate mac-addresses. So what the DSL AN does is create a new
> mac-addr per home and then this mac-addr is used to send data from the
> AN to the Internet.  If the DSL AN does such a new mac-addr creation,
> then our suggested tunnel for the RA back terminates at the AN.  The AN
> has enough information to de-multiplex the tunneled RA to the individual
> home. I have cced Ashok in this email to keep me honest. 
> 
> If existing tunneling mechanisms work, why do we need any of the
> draft-gundavelli-v6ops-l2-unicast or this document in the IETF?  If DSL
> folks really want such existing IPv6 mechanisms specified, one could do
> so in the DSL standards bodies.

The mechanism specified in this document requires allocation of a 
destination option and it can be allocated one only through standards 
action. So, while the mechanism has been specified in the BBF specs 
already, the option to be used has not been allocated.

Thanks
Suresh