Re: [v6ops] draft-binet-v6ops-cellular-host-requirements-01

Hi Jouni,

The question of overlapping is not important IMHO as the two documents are targeting distinct objectives. I thought you agreed with this point (below an excerpt from the minutes):

"
Lorenzo C - Doc 1 is a shopping list document 2 is a treatis on how
you implment ipv6 on 3316. they're not covering the same domain

Jouni K - Agree with Lorenzo - different objectives so they need to be
treated differently
"

If now you are claiming yours is also doing what draft-binet-* does, I'm puzzled then...

Cheers,
Med 

>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : jouni korhonen [mailto:jouni.nospam@gmail.com] 
>Envoyé : dimanche 18 novembre 2012 00:14
>À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/OLN
>Cc : v6ops@ietf.org WG
>Objet : Re: [v6ops] draft-binet-v6ops-cellular-host-requirements-01
>
>
>Hi,
>
>Likewise rfc3316bis assumes IPv6-only or dual-stack. Point 
>being, rfc3316bis does not do in direction that is not 
>necessary to run IPv6 (in a possibly multi interfaced host). 
>IMHO the rest like NAT related recommendations, transition 
>recommendations, WLAN specifics, tethering recommendations are 
>then well served in draft-bonet-*.
>
>- Jouni
>
>On Nov 16, 2012, at 3:17 PM, <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> 
><mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> wrote:
>
>> Re-,
>> 
>> draft-binet-* assumes both DS and IPv6-only deployment 
>modes. Nothing specific there.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Med
>> 
>>> -----Message d'origine-----
>>> De : jouni korhonen [mailto:jouni.nospam@gmail.com] 
>>> Envoyé : vendredi 16 novembre 2012 14:09
>>> À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/OLN
>>> Cc : v6ops@ietf.org WG
>>> Objet : Re: [v6ops] draft-binet-v6ops-cellular-host-requirements-01
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Med,
>>> 
>>> I still see no reason to replicate information since what 
>>> comes to "a pure IPv6 profile for a 3GPP link", it should be 
>>> exactly the same in both documents. I am just trying to avoid 
>>> misalignment now and in the future. I would also argue that 
>>> draft-binet-* is a profile for a specific deployment(s) in 
>>> mind, not a generic IPv6 profile for cellular. It is a way 
>>> more (not that it would be a bad thing though..).
>>> 
>>> - Jouni
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Nov 16, 2012, at 2:07 PM, <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> 
>>> <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi Jouni,
>>>> 
>>>> What I understood from the v6ops meeting is that wg 
>>> participants see these two documents have distinct objectives. 
>>> As such the question of overlapping does not apply as these 
>>> documents serve two distinct objectives. Furthermore, because 
>>> draft-binet-*'s objective is to define an IPv6 profile for 
>>> cellular, we prefer the document be self-contained and use 
>>> consistent language for all requirements.
>>>> 
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Med 
>>>> 
>>>>> -----Message d'origine-----
>>>>> De : Jouni [mailto:jouni.nospam@gmail.com] 
>>>>> Envoyé : jeudi 15 novembre 2012 16:40
>>>>> À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/OLN
>>>>> Cc : v6ops@ietf.org; Mikael Abrahamsson; Pete Vickers
>>>>> Objet : Re: [v6ops] 
>draft-binet-v6ops-cellular-host-requirements-01
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Med,
>>>>> 
>>>>> I am slightly confused about the overlap of 
>>>>> draft-binet-v6ops-* and draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc3316bis. My 
>>>>> recollection was that overlaps were supposed to be removed and 
>>>>> then concentrate on the remaining part in draft-binet-v6ops-*, 
>>>>> no? This would concern requirements #1, #6, #7, #8, #9, #17, 
>>>>> #22, #23, #25, #26, #27. My recommendation would be removing 
>>>>> those and just reference to [draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc3316bis] 
>>>>> because the base IPv6 compliancy would come from there and I 
>>>>> see no reason to repeat those here.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Then a question about the relevance of #24. Given the current 
>>>>> bandwidth in 3G/LTE is there really a need to compress 
>>>>> headers? And if people really see it as a life critical 
>>>>> feature to have, I would appreciate listing the ROHC profiles 
>>>>> that are essential (e.g., align with IR.92 & IR.58 that will 
>>>>> be implemented on the network side).
>>>>> 
>>>>> - Jouni
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Nov 15, 2012, at 4:59 PM, <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> 
>>>>> <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> We submitted a new version of the draft to take into account 
>>>>> the comments received from M. Abrahamsson and P. Vickers.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The main changes are:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> * Add some clarification text for REQ#3
>>>>>> * Mention stateless dhcpv6 is useful to retrieve other 
>>>>> information than DNS
>>>>>> * Re-word REQ#15
>>>>>> * Cite "Happy Eyeballs" in REQ#16
>>>>>> * Update the text of REQ#17
>>>>>> * Add two sub-requirements to REQ#19: IPv6-only 
>>> connectivity + SLAAC
>>>>>> * Precise the ordering in REQ#21
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> A more detailed diff is available at:
>>>>>> 
>>>>> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-binet-v6ops-cellular-hos
>>>>> t-requirements-01
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Chairs, would it be possible to issue a Call For Adoption 
>>>>> for this document? Thanks.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Med
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -----Message d'origine-----
>>>>>> De : i-d-announce-bounces@ietf.org 
>>>>> [mailto:i-d-announce-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de 
>>>>> internet-drafts@ietf.org
>>>>>> Envoyé : jeudi 15 novembre 2012 15:53
>>>>>> À : i-d-announce@ietf.org
>>>>>> Objet : I-D Action: 
>>>>> draft-binet-v6ops-cellular-host-requirements-01.txt
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line 
>>>>> Internet-Drafts directories.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 	Title           : Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) 
>>>>> Requirements for Cellular Hosts
>>>>>> 	Author(s)       : David Binet
>>>>>>                        Mohamed Boucadair
>>>>>>                        Ales Vizdal
>>>>>>                        Cameron Byrne
>>>>>>                        Gang Chen
>>>>>> 	Filename        : 
>>>>> draft-binet-v6ops-cellular-host-requirements-01.txt
>>>>>> 	Pages           : 16
>>>>>> 	Date            : 2012-11-15
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Abstract:
>>>>>> This document lists a set of IPv6-related requirements to be
>>>>>> supported by cellular hosts.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>>>>>> 
>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-binet-v6ops-cellular-hos
>>>>> t-requirements
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> There's also a htmlized version available at:
>>>>>> 
>>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-binet-v6ops-cellular-host-requ
>>>>> irements-01
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>>>>>> 
>>>>> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-binet-v6ops-cellular-hos
>>>>> t-requirements-01
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>>>>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> I-D-Announce mailing list
>>>>>> I-D-Announce@ietf.org
>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
>>>>>> Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
>>>>>> or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> v6ops mailing list
>>>>>> v6ops@ietf.org
>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>>>>> 
>>> 
>
>