[v6ops] Clarifications on draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc3316bis-00.txt
Hui Deng <denghui02@gmail.com> Sat, 17 November 2012 16:56 UTC
Return-Path: <denghui02@gmail.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 2E31F21F8708 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 17 Nov 2012 08:56:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4ofGjRDTcasb for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 17 Nov 2012 08:56:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qa0-f51.google.com (mail-qa0-f51.google.com [209.85.216.51]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6338F21F846C for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sat, 17 Nov 2012 08:56:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qa0-f51.google.com with SMTP id t11so2449279qaa.10 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sat, 17 Nov 2012 08:56:13 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=ukyvS39imvXeLun/v1vlz0nSKlGL8sUK/ISbMQxxJIs=; b=n7q023eYIYE3RfZqFNgZ1nJSZIVXHLK2soJBKL8X8dcDDW9rCM65R4gBh3sGmD38Fz FUR6bqZDZsOO+Kvy7Hf9yM3SHQQwA0HpOkJGPQnyGJD9WOpu1/td89uwCEwDH4wdldUo Q/Cq744yYw7a0zJhohAFBK2hFfCAEFUA8qy2Yj1yAW9Ex9Zy9nRDZwnJvOSHOT6WfVg9 FsIGynaoq/Sj/tz7ppoAjkrIeLH/sJWsHRJ+oCGb6Vf3CNKGkjH502dQjjMtGX2Dqx0q oL4TenN0z3p8b/uYBAu6vN4kNPUk2l5u70TtUXVVsYYoilcJXda7IwRABSc2cNX56QiP Xl0g==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.224.201.73 with SMTP id ez9mr7550406qab.92.1353171373805; Sat, 17 Nov 2012 08:56:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.49.97.4 with HTTP; Sat, 17 Nov 2012 08:56:13 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2012 10:56:13 -0600
Message-ID: <CANF0JMBf9fpp5Hm40+sW-sV4qpw9LXAagyaNZaNzuWZ944_s3w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Hui Deng <denghui02@gmail.com>
To: v6ops@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="20cf3010edaf0e4f1a04ceb3c3f2"
Subject: [v6ops] Clarifications on draft-ietf-v6ops-rfc3316bis-00.txt
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: Sat, 17 Nov 2012 16:56:15 -0000
Hello, authors, in section 2.11, it says "learning the DNS server addresses from the link layer signaling can be cumbersome when the MT and the TE are separated using other techniques than PPP interface" Can you be more specific about what else could be used? and what can be cumbersome? for privacy consideration, can you help to write some analysis text about the relationship with "always on capability in 3GPP" Does SIPTO/LIPA has some influence on this document? thanks -Hui