Re: [Softwires] I-D Action: draft-ietf-softwire-map-08.txt

[<[e-mail]>]

Hi Ole,

The documents should be cross-references, that's clear. 

If I recall well what was discussed (and which I assumed agreed) in Atlanta, is the unified CPE draft governs the CE side for all softwire flavors. The consequence is provisioning discussion in particular should be removed from MAP, LW4ov6, etc documents ... instead be discussed exclusively in the unified CPE I-D. 

I will refer to Suresh on this point since he was present during that discussion and also because this is a action to preserve the coherency of the overall ongoing specification efforts conducted by the WG.

Cheers,
Med

>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : Ole Troan [mailto:[e-mail]]
>Envoyé : mardi 13 août 2013 09:34
>À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/OLN
>Cc : [e-mail]
>Objet : Re: [Softwires] I-D Action: draft-ietf-softwire-map-08.txt
>
>Med,
>
>> I have two comments about the new version:
>>
>> * The document does not cite the unified CPE I-D. I think Senthil already
>raised this point to the authors, but it seems this was not taken into
>account. I suggest adding that document as a normative reference.
>
>the unified CPE document depends on MAP, not the other way around.
>
>> * I-D.ietf-softwire-map-dhcp is to be listed as an example to achieve
>provisioning (other means can be supported). This ref can be cited as
>informative and not normative one.
>
>true, the reason it is listed as normative is because we have a SHOULD for
>DHCP:
>   "A CE that allows IPv6 configuration by DHCP SHOULD implement this
>option."
>
>cheers,
>Ole