Re: [mif] Route option for DHCPv6 - next steps?

[jouni korhonen <[e-mail]>]

On Apr 24, 2012, at 3:20 PM, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:

[snip]


>> As for #3: RFC 6204 doesn't specify any specific technology, and it's
>> certainly not limited to ADSL. Much of the behaviour it specifies is
>> equally applicable to CPEs whose uplink is a cellular link.
> 
> ?
> 
> 'CPE' is not a term used for the cellular links, I think. RFC6204 says
> 'residential or small-office router'. I think it is a stretch to claim
> that RFC6204 applies to cellular links. E.g. few if any cellular

RFC6204 is not necessarily the best fit for cellular (6204bis does it 
better) but it definitely does not preclude one making a compliant CE
device with a cellular WAN link.

> terminals use DHCP as of today, whereas RFC6204 would require them all
> to. Also, RFC6204 requires all cellular terminals to use Ethernet

So? You would most likely use your cellular just as a modem to connect
to network and the rest of the system & stack would be in the host side
of the CE. This is sometimes referred as the "split-UE" in 3GPP circles.

> encapsulation on their WAN interface whereas none actually does.

All WLL-* requirements start with "If the WAN interface supports.."
effectively making the following MUST conditional. Those MUSTs, like
for ethernet, apply only when the WAN implements the said technology.

> There is another RFC - 3316 - "IPv6 for some 2G and 3G Cellular Hosts"
> which relates more to cellular.

Or a bit more recent RFC6459..

- Jouni


> 
> Alex
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mif mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif