IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-17.txt - DHCP-PD

Ross Chandler <ross@eircom.net> Wed, 18 February 2015 20:48 UTC

Return-Path: <ross@eircom.net>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CA361A1A8B for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 12:48:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.908
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=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 3PxxxwN183gu for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 12:48:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail02.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net (mail02.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net [159.134.118.18]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 202CC1A1A54 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 12:48:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 87184 messnum 13086391 invoked from network[213.94.190.14/avas02.vendorsvc.cra.dublin.eircom.net]); 18 Feb 2015 20:48:12 -0000
Received: from avas02.vendorsvc.cra.dublin.eircom.net (213.94.190.14) by mail02.svc.cra.dublin.eircom.net (qp 87184) with SMTP; 18 Feb 2015 20:48:12 -0000
Received: from [192.168.1.1] ([86.43.35.194]) by avas02.vendorsvc.cra.dublin.eircom.net with Cloudmark Gateway id two91p0054BK5ly01woCRS; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 20:48:12 +0000
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_892E8AA3-0B6F-4C76-AEEF-E36BDB6D9A90"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\))
From: Ross Chandler <ross@eircom.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAC8SSWswVfT2KZF-L-TJveszJ5SZn_1xuMvwG_aP2-CHw5erjg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 20:48:08 +0000
Message-Id: <F40B1638-F988-4B81-8D74-F40AE13ACDA7@eircom.net>
References: <20150212124226.3282.9774.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <54DCD464.3000907@gmail.com> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93300490A7DD@OPEXCLILM23.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <6536E263028723489CCD5B6821D4B21303DEA4B0@UK30S005EXS06.EEAD.EEINT.CO.UK> <54DDF37D.1050405@gmail.com> <6536E263028723489CCD5B6821D4B21303DEA605@UK30S005EXS06.EEAD.EEINT.CO.UK> <54DE0BA8.8020908@gmail.com> <6536E263028723489CCD5B6821D4B21303DEA722@UK30S005EXS06.EEAD.EEINT.CO.UK> <54DE227D.9050303@gmail.com> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93300490B969@OPEXCLILM23.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <A0BB7AD89EA705449C486BDB5FDCBC7B2851152A@OPE10MB06.tp.gk.corp.tepenet> <54E1D42C.5040605@gmail.com> <A0BB7AD89EA705449C486BDB5FDCBC7B28511B64@OPE10MB06.tp.gk.corp.tepenet> <54E48C2E.2020703@gmail.com> <CAC8SSWswVfT2KZF-L-TJveszJ5SZn_1xuMvwG_aP2-CHw5erjg@mail.gmail.com>
To: jouni korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/1vDU-0X3K9e_jVm1IyCcImiUv88>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>, Kossut Tomasz - Hurt <Tomasz.Kossut@orange.com>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-17.txt - DHCP-PD
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 20:48:17 -0000

> On 18 Feb 2015, at 16:47, jouni korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 4:57 AM, Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com <mailto:alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Le 18/02/2015 12:13, Kossut Tomasz - Hurt a écrit :
> Hi,
> 
> Inline comments:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Thank you for the report. It is good to see how good consideration
> is given to IPv6, and the two separated paths IPv4/IPv6.
> 
> It is encouraging to see numerous smartphone manufacturers having
> embraced the CLAT technology.
> 
> (tk) - this is not only CLAT, (CLAT is in generic Android thanks to
> Lorenzo, Cameron, Dan & others) each vendor has its own
> customization based on MCCMNC/region to control "features" per
> operator. In our case we have :  dedicated clatd.conf (not generic
> one), IPv6 tethering(DHCPv6, RA, Relay IPv6 DNS)
> 
> It's good to see these mentioned.
> 
> For tethering - is the network offering DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation
> service?  Or is the device performing '64share' RFC7278?
> 
> There are some advantages on doing the former rather than the latter.
> 
> EIT bit =1,
> 
> What is the EIT bit?
> 
> My wild guess is that it is the ESM information transfer flag bit in the ESM information transfer flag information element. If it is, it does not really have anything to do with IPv6 IMHO.
> 
> - Jouni

As far as I can tell from a previous answer on v6ops by Orange PL the EIT bit (think it is ESM info transfer flag IE) has an effect when the HSS has a default APN different from the one requested by the UE.  Without the EIT bit set the network doesn’t let the UE requested APN override the default from the HSS, so two PDN connections are set up, one with IPv4 (assuming the default is an IPv4 only APN) and the other IPv6 (assuming that was requested by the UE).  So strictly speaking it does look independent of IP version but it is being noticed as operators introduce IPv6.

Ross

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email