Re: [v6ops] draft-palet-v6ops-transition-ipv4aas discussion

[JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[e-mail]>]

Hi Masanobu,

Thanks for your input. I also recall that you had 464XLAT, MAP-T and lw4o6 implemented. May be not in the "regular" firmware?

Regarding RFC8026, can you describe what is the issue that you have?

May be this document could be used to update RFC8026 if something is missing, or alternatively we will need to look into amending whatever is wrong in RFC8026, but in any case, we need to understand very well the issue.

Or do you mean that we need a more detailed description in draft-palet-v6ops-transition-ipv4aas about how to use RFC8026?

Regards,
Jordi
 
 
-----Mensaje original-----
De: v6ops <[e-mail]> en nombre de Masanobu Kawashima <[e-mail]>
Fecha: jueves, 19 de abril de 2018, 15:15
Para: V6 Ops List <[e-mail]>
Asunto: Re: [v6ops] draft-palet-v6ops-transition-ipv4aas discussion

    
    Hi, 
    
    I support this document as a working group document. 
    
    Our company is already providing DS-Lite and MAP-E CE router. 
    However, this document will help CE router vendors as nice guideline like RFC 7084. 
    I'm co-chair of IPv6 home router SWG in IPv6 promotion counsil in Japan. 
    This will also help our local guideline for ISP's and CE router vendors. 
    
    I'd also like to discuss about RFC8026 DHCPv6 S46 priority option in this document. 
    Because we can't use DHCPv6 option in actual situation. 
    
    Regards, 
    Masanobu 
    
    ==================================== 
     NEC Platforms, Ltd.                 
     KAWASHIMA Masanobu                  
     [e-mail]            
     https://www.necplatforms.co.jp/en/  
    ==================================== 
    
    
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: v6ops [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Fred Baker
    > Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2018 7:40 AM
    > To: V6 Ops List <[e-mail]>
    > Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-palet-v6ops-transition-ipv4aas discussion
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > > On Apr 18, 2018, at 11:17 AM, Lee Howard <[e-mail]> wrote:
    > >
    > > I think this document is needed.
    > 
    > So, in addition to the authors, we have three people (Richard, Barbara, and Lee) that have said to the list that this
    > document "is needed", by which I infer that they want it to be adopted as a working group document. That said, as
    > I said to Fred Templin a few weeks ago, that isn't proof of a consensus.
    > 
    > The chairs would be interested to know how many do, and how many do not, want that to happen. If you have specific
    > arguments, relevance to your part of the world, and so on, that's important too.
    
    _______________________________________________
    v6ops mailing list
    [e-mail]
    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 exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.