Re: [renum] FW: New Version Notification for draft-liu-6renum-gap-analysis-02.txt

"George, Wes" <wesley.george@twcable.com> Sat, 12 November 2011 08:44 UTC

Return-Path: <wesley.george@twcable.com>
X-Original-To: renum@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: renum@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07A8921F8557 for <renum@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 00:44:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.348
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.348 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.115, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NBT7Bj8D7WPC for <renum@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 00:44:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cdpipgw02.twcable.com (cdpipgw02.twcable.com [165.237.59.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6230021F8551 for <renum@ietf.org>; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 00:44:17 -0800 (PST)
X-SENDER-IP: 10.136.163.12
X-SENDER-REPUTATION: None
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.69,498,1315195200"; d="scan'208";a="281310949"
Received: from unknown (HELO PRVPEXHUB03.corp.twcable.com) ([10.136.163.12]) by cdpipgw02.twcable.com with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-MD5; 12 Nov 2011 03:39:28 -0500
Received: from PRVPEXVS03.corp.twcable.com ([10.136.163.27]) by PRVPEXHUB03.corp.twcable.com ([10.136.163.12]) with mapi; Sat, 12 Nov 2011 03:44:15 -0500
From: "George, Wes" <wesley.george@twcable.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 03:44:36 -0500
Thread-Topic: [renum] FW: New Version Notification for draft-liu-6renum-gap-analysis-02.txt
Thread-Index: Acyg1vfdcxY5btySSWK2IQDXiYb5agAPXdfQ
Message-ID: <DCC302FAA9FE5F4BBA4DCAD4656937791451B2CCE1@PRVPEXVS03.corp.twcable.com>
References: <8AE0F17B87264D4CAC7DE0AA6C406F45236535FE@szxeml509-mbx.china.huawei.com> <DCC302FAA9FE5F4BBA4DCAD4656937791451B2CC6A@PRVPEXVS03.corp.twcable.com> <4EBDC5EC.3000009@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4EBDC5EC.3000009@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "renum@ietf.org" <renum@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [renum] FW: New Version Notification for draft-liu-6renum-gap-analysis-02.txt
X-BeenThere: renum@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Renumbering discussion mailing list." <renum.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/renum>, <mailto:renum-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/renum>
List-Post: <mailto:renum@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:renum-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/renum>, <mailto:renum-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 08:44:18 -0000

> From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 11, 2011 8:04 PM
> To: George, Wes
> Cc: Leo Liu(bing); renum@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [renum] FW: New Version Notification for draft-liu-6renum-
> gap-analysis-02.txt
>
>
> I think there's scope for analysing shim6 in the context of
> renumbering.
> It wasn't really a consideration during the design.
>
[WEG] agree, hadn't really thought about shim6 in that context, which is why I didn't make the connection. As a solution it'd mainly be a question of applicability and benefits vs costs to implement, because while we have running code, wide deployment is another matter entirely.

>
> In all cases, session survivability requires a persistent ID of some
> kind, as far as the transport layer is concerned.
[WEG] and that's critical to include in the discussion regarding its applicability to renumbering

>
> We do need to decide how much of a goal session survivability is. IMHO
> it is a hard goal, and it only affects a very small number of
> applications.
>
[WEG] WG Chair hat on: Since in this WG we're not suggesting solutions to the gaps we identify in most cases, I'm not sure we have to come to a definite decision on that. Session Survivability is a part of any gap discussion on renumbering, and the more articulate we can be on the potential options, where they still have gaps, and where we don't have any solutions will be helpful in determining what follow-on work must be done when passing protocol work to other WGs.

Wes


This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.