Re: [pcp] Query related to the status of draft-ietf-pcp-dslite!

<mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> Fri, 07 October 2016 12:41 UTC

Return-Path: <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>
X-Original-To: pcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D8C0129580 for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Oct 2016 05:41:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.614
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.614 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.996, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IWxTfVovq1Ux for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Oct 2016 05:41:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relais-inet.orange.com (relais-nor36.orange.com [80.12.70.36]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57231129579 for <pcp@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Oct 2016 05:41:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from opfednr02.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.66]) by opfednr22.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 7A1802087D; Fri, 7 Oct 2016 14:41:22 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme2.itn.ftgroup (unknown [xx.xx.31.17]) by opfednr02.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 381E5120055; Fri, 7 Oct 2016 14:41:22 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::60a9:abc3:86e6:2541]) by OPEXCLILM24.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::a1e6:3e6a:1f68:5f7e%18]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Fri, 7 Oct 2016 14:41:22 +0200
From: <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>
To: Jayaraghavendran Kuppannan <jayaraghavendran.ietf@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [pcp] Query related to the status of draft-ietf-pcp-dslite!
Thread-Index: AQHSIJNcSZSTqVdq50CsY+Smd38gNaCc7h2g
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 12:41:21 +0000
Message-ID: <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933008E3DFD7@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
References: <CAOxcgciQ3La-ORPFE84qZN05hNRbjLrSJNMmCe5e5pP89oKZ3g@mail.gmail.com> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933008E3DF7A@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <CAOxcgcgg-xMaJptNVQEb2bsQFg9Fiy5OCGAiXzoOUzA0SY1XmA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOxcgcgg-xMaJptNVQEb2bsQFg9Fiy5OCGAiXzoOUzA0SY1XmA@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.168.234.1]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933008E3DFD7OPEXCLILMA3corp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pcp/UxPrtaitJqtOa1NQufBqKpehDSE>
Cc: "pcp@ietf.org" <pcp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [pcp] Query related to the status of draft-ietf-pcp-dslite!
X-BeenThere: pcp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: PCP wg discussion list <pcp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pcp>, <mailto:pcp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pcp/>
List-Post: <mailto:pcp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pcp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcp>, <mailto:pcp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2016 12:41:26 -0000

Re-,

I’m afraid there is less chance to see this revived. There is no activity anymore in the PCP WG.

Cheers,
Med

De : Jayaraghavendran Kuppannan [mailto:jayaraghavendran.ietf@gmail.com]
Envoyé : vendredi 7 octobre 2016 14:07
À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN
Cc : pcp@ietf.org
Objet : Re: [pcp] Query related to the status of draft-ietf-pcp-dslite!

Hi Med,

Thanks for your reply.

Are you aware of any plans to revive the draft or the reasons why it was shelved?

I feel having that document would have helped for interoperability as you have rightly mentioned.

Regards,
Jay



On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 5:16 PM, <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com<mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>> wrote:
Dear Jay,

Yes, that draft expired.

FWIW, our PCP deployment in DS-Lite contexts adopt the following design:

•         Use plain IPv6 to contact the PCP server.

•         If no PCP server is explicitly configured, the PCP client must use the AFTR as its PCP server.

•         THIRD_PARTY is enabled.

Having a document would be helpful for interoperability but it was not a blocking point in our case.

Cheers,
Med

De : pcp [mailto:pcp-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:pcp-bounces@ietf.org>] De la part de Jayaraghavendran Kuppannan
Envoyé : vendredi 7 octobre 2016 13:00
À : pcp@ietf.org<mailto:pcp@ietf.org>
Objet : [pcp] Query related to the status of draft-ietf-pcp-dslite!

Hi All,

As I can see, the draft-ietf-pcp-dslite seems to have expired quite long back and there is no further activity on this.

I tried searching through the archives and couldn't find relevant details as to why it was not carried forward.

Also, can someone point to me, if some other draft/RFC exists which relates to using PCP with DS-Lite?

Thanks!

Regards,
Jay