[shara] Summary and outcomes from aplusp BoF at IETF 76

Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com> Fri, 04 December 2009 16:58 UTC

Return-Path: <rdroms@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: shara@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: shara@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F08E13A692B; Fri, 4 Dec 2009 08:58:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Usa3PJ9lUBO0; Fri, 4 Dec 2009 08:58:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sj-iport-2.cisco.com (sj-iport-2.cisco.com [171.71.176.71]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3409F3A688E; Fri, 4 Dec 2009 08:58:56 -0800 (PST)
Authentication-Results: sj-iport-2.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEACrOGEtAZnwM/2dsb2JhbADAJJcvgjWBfgQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.47,342,1257120000"; d="scan'208";a="227241940"
Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com ([64.102.124.12]) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 04 Dec 2009 16:58:47 +0000
Received: from bxb-rdroms-8712.cisco.com (bxb-rdroms-8712.cisco.com [10.98.10.83]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nB4GwkRJ016307; Fri, 4 Dec 2009 16:58:46 GMT
Message-Id: <8FD04E6A-62DF-4606-A374-CBE657F0CF0B@cisco.com>
From: Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>
To: shara@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936)
Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2009 11:58:46 -0500
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936)
Cc: IESG IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, Softwire Chairs <softwire-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: [shara] Summary and outcomes from aplusp BoF at IETF 76
X-BeenThere: shara@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Sharing of an IPv4 Address discussion list <shara.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/shara>, <mailto:shara-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/shara>
List-Post: <mailto:shara@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:shara-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/shara>, <mailto:shara-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2009 16:58:57 -0000

Thanks to Dan and Christian for chairing the BoF and to everyone who
participated.  I especially thank the participants for staying on
topic and having a constructive and useful discussion of the issues
during the BoF.

There were a couple of aspects of the BoF that I wish I had handled
better.  In particular, I didn't intend to exclude any of the
proponents of the various a+p proposals related to dual-stack lite
(DS-lite) and, in retrospect, we could have done a better job with the
initial formulation of the questions asked at the end of the BoF.
I'll reiterate that I think the chairs did a great job with the BoF,
considering the history and context of the topic, and the shortcomings
of the BoF are really my responsibility.

However, I think that this BoF, considered with the outcome of the
previous shara BoF, came to a couple of useful conclusions:

* there is a need to provide inbound connections to
   subscriber-provided services, and
* a+p has too many side effects, not all of which are known at this
   point, to be a useful mechanism to meet that need.

Comments on these conclusions is encouraged...

Considering this outcome, no work on a+p will be chartered.  I will
ask the softwire WG to consider the issue of inbound connections to
subscriber-provided services as part of their work on DS-lite.  Other
working groups may take on development of techniques for providing
inbound connections in other technologies and scenarios.

- Ralph