Re: [v6ops] New Version Notification for draft-baker-v6ops-cpe-autoconfigure-00.txt

Hi Fred,

I just read the document and I think is something needed.

In fact, it should be one requirement to be a should or must in the RFC7084-bis. Not sure if others agree and if there is some way to “sync” a reference in the RFC7084-bis with an individual I-D (I got an input previously to remove that), until it becomes an RFC (if approved), or it means “holding” it …

Of course, if there is no opposition in the WG, this may be approved and go to the last call quicker than the RFC7084-bis, so not being an issue.

Regards,
Jordi

-----Mensaje original-----
De: v6ops <v6ops-bounces@ietf.org> en nombre de Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
Responder a: <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
Fecha: sábado, 17 de junio de 2017, 23:21
Para: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
Asunto: Re: [v6ops] New Version Notification for draft-baker-v6ops-cpe-autoconfigure-00.txt

    In discussion with John Brzozowski, he expressed a concern that CPEs don't come "out of the box preconfigured for IPv6" as they often do for IPv4. I had a recent experience with a new router at my home that made the point in my mind; IPv6 was an "advanced configuration", and the difference between "auto-configure" and "auto-detect" was a little lost on me. 

    So I have a question. Do we need to spell this out for CPE vendors? I have spliced together a draft on the topic. I'd welcome comments that might improve it, especially if I have something egregiously wrong. Second, I'm curious whether the working group thinks we need this.

    Your thoughts?

    > On Jun 17, 2017, at 2:14 PM, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
    > 
    > 
    > A new version of I-D, draft-baker-v6ops-cpe-autoconfigure-00.txt
    > has been successfully submitted by Fred Baker and posted to the
    > IETF repository.
    > 
    > Name:		draft-baker-v6ops-cpe-autoconfigure
    > Revision:	00
    > Title:		Requirements for a Zero-Configuration IPv6 CPE
    > Document date:	2017-06-17
    > Group:		Individual Submission
    > Pages:		6
    > URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-baker-v6ops-cpe-autoconfigure-00.txt
    > Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-baker-v6ops-cpe-autoconfigure/
    > Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-baker-v6ops-cpe-autoconfigure-00
    > Htmlized:       https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-baker-v6ops-cpe-autoconfigure-00
    > 
    > 
    > Abstract:
    >   This note is a breif exploration of what is required for a CPE to be
    >   auto-configurable from the perspective on an ISP or other upstream
    >   network.  It assumes that the CPE may also be IPv4-capable (probably
    >   using NAPT), but that the requirements for that are well understood
    >   and need no further specification.
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > 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.
    > 
    > The IETF Secretariat
    > 

    _______________________________________________
    v6ops mailing list
    v6ops@ietf.org
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.consulintel.es
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.