IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Softwires] I-D Action: draft-ietf-softwire-unified-cpe-04.txt

Ian Farrer <ianfarrer@gmx.com> Fri, 22 April 2016 09:02 UTC

Return-Path: <ianfarrer@gmx.com>
X-Original-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6A5B12E8DF for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 02:02:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 zKaVyp2dcGXK for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 02:02:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DEF9412E89D for <softwires@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 02:02:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ians-mbp.lan ([62.225.30.138]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MAkkB-1b0Mk61AOx-00BtFp for <softwires@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 11:02:17 +0200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\))
From: Ian Farrer <ianfarrer@gmx.com>
In-Reply-To: <20160422085630.7587.49026.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 11:02:16 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <ABC753BE-BB81-42A0-8772-3CB576284492@gmx.com>
References: <20160422085630.7587.49026.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: Softwires WG <softwires@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104)
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:Kg/vN6i1G09W4YZp9k5/Y7PO85lOocKT+THbuu9cxVfVaqIlxvp 9S9AKQHrqG6uEhoqpAlgGDhLwwo6kYAH3rWQp7AdU3fslVkjv3ND9R70suFX3ST+EQiY1iH QbR9HSNSXjOHIj0DdncYkFKJq6J1VT31Hc+yATK/+UA5KSxrtabcaspuAy/Hh/gUrwle8gj HjBsR9WWPcusQ8QRgfELg==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:T6qZSDjM7Gg=:KBg2R0rm0E8W201EZIvGEt BdHPGLAJXGY6xRy+1xuRWUCDwEUti8O/7mUYOoaow1yPh/7NUgA6zO+VvysDNkrdkXGSiUL47 qMXmGuXFf3Omhogzha9vaumxGbKwk7NFbmEOvNwBTuDyImmpHvRQcoaBQqkvzg+JjC7vl8CRF IEflRVbcNYh7ufTws+Q43mxB5raG5c4HJdvUwuKFhJO7wxf8T3WK6Dzu9ggIvjC2RVDlfN5hu 1vqm7LgYBTCH0JWxVo4qH9aBqYsmvsFgB5DSWx8goSvHLjXCLIcgtE14k5+TQyczyspDj1+gS 4d+8XHhMeqLRLUm1jo+MVr1Dhk3itTK+sgCxpoe7gxS6wMD5Zl7Buze//ielicsiPFjItlL+B 1FmLlvXTPbRHp/FF5zLog0lR7fb+E51XuW73csnWKF7clgnR4Na//C6S2f+Q6sOaoaaQZ1AOe Js8T278snUPUj5jz5ubVg1ndaiqHA/VxsVKp2ZfRb/10+AVNbUpRh0Bf0AGeL2BTo5mPM3/tc WgMcf37Rjf8MNl7dU/ZCBRhN5l/5SUvfaRzYYn1xgcWrvbGXaQtPJytKD+H0EXX4L6yDFinnm LkDf4pVpjTpZEAGzhjuolJfHjHGTuKlZwPpJNunZo2pNa0dl4FGscuGMpM4QKEYcZvg0lrPmX NL2bCVrVocn5mNwiuCQy9uc+8A2U43aw322QldQWylxp21Ic8WWm+QXnXWxLSWS3J4Fxm3H0I VFB0gG7XXZRlFOWvLg2zUxGT/phX5bxh6Za5BX5FQbGHn9TiFG1erFi6iu7nhe54EFIQlLBRJ g/ybous
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/softwires/ShNTpw-XqdhmxvmB8lsNbvnEhm0>
Subject: Re: [Softwires] I-D Action: draft-ietf-softwire-unified-cpe-04.txt
X-BeenThere: softwires@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: softwires wg discussion list <softwires.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/softwires/>
List-Post: <mailto:softwires@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 09:02:23 -0000

Hi,

I’ve just uploaded a new version of this draft that we believe tackles the comments received at WGLC. The major change to the document is the addition of a new ‘Deployment Considerations’ section towards the end of the document which discusses address planning considerations and backwards compatibility with CEs which don’t implement the new option.

A couple of nits have been fixed as well.

Please send any comments etc.

Cheers,
Ian


> On 22 Apr 2016, at 10:56, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
> 
> 
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
> This draft is a work item of the Softwires of the IETF.
> 
>        Title           : Unified IPv4-in-IPv6 Softwire CPE
>        Authors         : Mohamed Boucadair
>                          Ian Farrer
> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-softwire-unified-cpe-04.txt
> 	Pages           : 9
> 	Date            : 2016-04-22
> 
> Abstract:
>   In IPv6-only provider networks, transporting IPv4 packets
>   encapsulated in IPv6 is a common solution to the problem of IPv4
>   service continuity.  A number of differing functional approaches have
>   been developed for this, each having their own specific
>   characteristics.  As these approaches share a similar functional
>   architecture and use the same data plane mechanisms, this memo
>   describes a specification whereby a single CPE can interwork with all
>   of the standardized and proposed approaches to providing encapsulated
>   IPv4 in IPv6 services.
> 
> 
> 
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-softwire-unified-cpe/
> 
> There's also a htmlized version available at:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-softwire-unified-cpe-04
> 
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-softwire-unified-cpe-04
> 
> 
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
> 
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Softwires mailing list
> Softwires@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email