IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-ietf-v6ops-6204bis

Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> Thu, 13 October 2011 19:47 UTC

Return-Path: <lorenzo@google.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 978EA21F8B3A for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Oct 2011 12:47:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.976
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id j0BBAKX0MPT8 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Oct 2011 12:47:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-out.google.com (smtp-out.google.com [216.239.44.51]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98C3921F8B30 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Oct 2011 12:47:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hpaq5.eem.corp.google.com (hpaq5.eem.corp.google.com [172.25.149.5]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id p9DJl6BQ001097 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Oct 2011 12:47:06 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1318535227; bh=SHYvIWyUFfxIqLoLDdCJLWLv894=; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:References:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=la8xCgqTnNUc6qbY1929BeeUEG2/n3fODr6J1Vfu+IC4s6JJs6+aE8ZKCwJ3ujCIM A0QE0ffvULHo/KSHQ3llA==
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=dkim-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date: message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type:x-system-of-record; b=f6Nz1ahBpi52v5nQH+SEufpp0OvY+HPjM3JmVifskkr78sYpeWcZuqXTUi8dMp9e9 iu+I48ZMSid+D/p5xAg0g==
Received: from ywm14 (ywm14.prod.google.com [10.192.13.14]) by hpaq5.eem.corp.google.com with ESMTP id p9DJl4I7004479 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Oct 2011 12:47:05 -0700
Received: by ywm14 with SMTP id 14so2367692ywm.4 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Oct 2011 12:47:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:x-system-of-record; bh=TEOG6Yf42v5NQ4noBg0O8jUJWo5LgEMwkwAhD521z6E=; b=IerKQz0sXBkZAgoxonX7aRg1iaYKVnLq/6cD8evVsCwA/nWmTpxvI9wI3drv+fbsae eoehKNYiOqxP2rPprD6w==
Received: by 10.150.206.6 with SMTP id d6mr6022132ybg.60.1318534786309; Thu, 13 Oct 2011 12:39:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.150.206.6 with SMTP id d6mr6022114ybg.60.1318534786118; Thu, 13 Oct 2011 12:39:46 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.150.96.7 with HTTP; Thu, 13 Oct 2011 12:39:26 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <24BE1240-F514-4408-BEE6-F37A9AB1E932@cisco.com>
References: <201110111355.p9BDt1M23806@ftpeng-update.cisco.com> <282BBE8A501E1F4DA9C775F964BB21FE3EB758B7A8@GRFMBX704BA020.griffon.local> <1B8E4C5A-D08B-4F37-B701-A39745136A33@cisco.com> <4E95ED46.1010404@viagenie.ca> <24BE1240-F514-4408-BEE6-F37A9AB1E932@cisco.com>
From: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 12:39:26 -0700
Message-ID: <CAKD1Yr0NH6CmqN5OtGeMTo8_be95DijZGKCxEFNsnu0sJiXsYA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000e0cd404d08cf5c004af334d81"
X-System-Of-Record: true
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-v6ops-6204bis@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-v6ops-6204bis@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-ietf-v6ops-6204bis
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 19:47:12 -0000

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 16:59, Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com> wrote:

> I'm not certain that an IPv6 CPE Routers document should be giving
> instructions for IPv4 CPE Routers... I'd personally rather keep this one
> clean and pull the rest into an IPv4-related draft. Color me biased.
>

Agreed. If I recall correctly, in Quebec consensus was that we should take
the 6204bis draft and split out a small, lightweight document that was close
to being done and only specified WAN side behaviour. That way we could
publish the document quickly, so as to unblock the deployments waiting on
it.

Holding this document writing new text about how PCP works is just going to
slow it down with no benefit. Why can't we just have this document go out
and put the PCP text, when it gets written, into a future document?

We already don't have a single document that explains what a CE router
manufacturer needs to do to implement a dual-stack gateway, but that's OK. I
think we all understand that in order for any device on the Internet to
work, any device needs to support more than one RFC.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email