RE: [Sip] comments on draft-gurbani-sip-ipv6-abnf-fix-00

"Jane Jiang" <janej@hq.speakeasy.net> Fri, 07 December 2007 02:39 UTC

Return-path: <sip-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J0T7Y-0006Ib-7C; Thu, 06 Dec 2007 21:39:20 -0500
Received: from sip by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1J0T7W-00069C-KA for sip-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 06 Dec 2007 21:39:18 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J0T7W-00067a-9m for sip@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Dec 2007 21:39:18 -0500
Received: from itclus2.sea5.speakeasy.net ([72.1.141.56] helo=EXCHANGE-BE2.speakeasy.net) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J0T7V-00005w-Tj for sip@ietf.org; Thu, 06 Dec 2007 21:39:18 -0500
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [Sip] comments on draft-gurbani-sip-ipv6-abnf-fix-00
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2007 18:39:16 -0800
Message-ID: <DED0424C02C83A4AB0419517605CD11E02F5D235@EXCHANGE-BE2.speakeasy.hq>
In-Reply-To: <BBE61D1553D8A34F812FF87377B2935F01F571BC@ATL1VEXC020.usdom003.tco.tc>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Sip] comments on draft-gurbani-sip-ipv6-abnf-fix-00
Thread-Index: Acg29s54K2uSMgVsQq+p+ys7MgzBFwAbRvRQABXJFjAAGp63IAAU71TA
References: <DED0424C02C83A4AB0419517605CD11E02F5D215@EXCHANGE-BE2.speakeasy.hq> <BBE61D1553D8A34F812FF87377B2935F01F571BC@ATL1VEXC020.usdom003.tco.tc>
From: Jane Jiang <janej@hq.speakeasy.net>
To: Brett Tate <brett@broadsoft.com>, sip@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 538aad3a3c4f01d8b6a6477ca4248793
Cc:
X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol <sip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:sip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: sip-bounces@ietf.org

Hi Brett,

Though IPv6 was initially designed to address the IP address space
issue, I feel like the mobility feature afforded by IPv6 address design
is a true value added.  

When we are mapping from IPv6 to IPv4, we will certainly loose some
information.  However, when we are mapping from IPv4 to IPv6, how can we
expand the digits in a way that we can actually  make the mapped IPv6
address to support mobility?  That is my question.

Thanks!

Jane

-----Original Message-----
From: Brett Tate [mailto:brett@broadsoft.com] 
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 10:26 AM
To: Jane Jiang; sip@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [Sip] comments on draft-gurbani-sip-ipv6-abnf-fix-00

> I guess the purpose of this discussion is about this particular draft,

> which intends to correct some mistakes existing in some RFCs.

Yes; the draft is expanding beyond the current ABNF fix to also correct
or more clearly document other IPv6 areas of rfc3261.


> I am wondering if you will want to discuss about the impacts of 
> mapping between IPv6 address and IPv4 address?

I'm not sure which aspect of mapping you are mentioning.
Draft-ietf-sipping-v6-transition and
draft-ietf-sipping-ipv6-torture-tests discuss some of the potential
issues.


> I feel like if we simply try to match the two from each other, we will

> not be able to maintain the original design beauties behind each 
> address structure.  Correct me if I am wrong.

I'm not sure that I understand the matching comment.  The current
understanding is that an IPv6 address does not equal an IPv4 address
from a SIP equality perspective.  However there are obviously
situations/services on a device where they might be treated the same:
identity, access control, etcetera.

There are situations where an IPv6 address contains an IPv4 address.
However I currently doubt that we need to discuss the matter beyond
highlighting such an address concerning equality and maybe additionally
503, looping, downgrading to IPv4, etcetera.


_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sipping@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip