Re: [Softwires] WG last call on draft-ietf-softwire-public-4over6-01

There is basic question regarding this draft, one that has also been raised
at previous WG meetings: "why is it needed?".
I do not think this draft should progress before a thorough review of this
space. We do not need another form of a classic dual stack "transition"
architecture!
Also, at best this draft is an informational one as opposed to standards
track.

There is a deeper issue here: This draft seems to give the impression that
running such a regular public addressed DHCPv4 based overlay on IPv6 is a
simple idea, as opposed to native dual stack. It is anything but, given
that a) it it requires changes to DHCPv4 processing b) it introduces non
trivial dependencies between DHCPv6 and DHCPv4 and tunnelling c) requires
changes to CPE d) makes life really a mess if we consider a real dual stack
CPE.

-Woj.

On 27 May 2012 16:30, Yong Cui <cuiyong@tsinghua.edu.cn> wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> This is a wg last call on draft-ietf-softwire-public-4over6-01.
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-softwire-public-4over6/
>
> As usual, please send editorial comments to the authors and
> substantive comments to the mailing list.
>
> This wg last call will end on 2012 June 10 at 12pm EDT.
>
>
> Yong & Alain
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Softwires mailing list
> Softwires@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
>