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

[Fred Baker <[e-mail]>]

> On Jun 21, 2017, at 9:06 AM, Lorenzo Colitti <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> We have already spelled it out in RFC 7084, which contains more detail than this draft.

And there I disagree. I'm happy to add more to the draft; it's an initial sketch. However, we have seen several comments to the effect that 7084 and TR-124 are not resulting in product that works "out of the box". In private email, Ole Troan suggests that I go implement something that works "out of the box" in an open source product, perhaps OpenWRT, and that's good. But I'll argue that before we do that, we should know what algorithm to implement.

What we have spelled out in RFC 7084, and BBF has spelled out in TR-124, is that the product must implement a list of specifications. It does not say that it has to work out of the box, and it doesn't say how to accomplish that goal if it is a goal.

I am starting to put together slides for IETF 99, and first making the case. You may be interested to review them. You may find the file, in its present state, at https://www.dropbox.com/s/bczr0dvukxn92w5/CPE%20Router%20Auto-configuration.pptx?dl=0. I don't want to call out a specific vendor in the case, but it's hard to avoid the name on their screen shots, so in the slides where I take screen shots of the configuration steps do us all a favor and ignore the name of the vendor - it's not important. What is important is what is required to actually turn basic IPv6 service on, in the router in my home, which was fully IPv4+NAPT-capable when I came to the first screen. It had to be, because it asked me to upgrade its firmware over my existing IPv4 network, and I was logged into it using IPv4.

And what is VERY important is that the router is, as far as I can determine, both RFC 7084 and TR-124 compliant. Being RFC 7084 and TR-124 compliant doesn't result in it selecting correctly among SLAAC and DHCP on the LAN and WAN interfaces when attached to a random upstream network.

Note that this note is specifically in response to a request from John Brzozowski that the IETF make his IPv6 deployment in Comcast easier. My comment to him on the call was that he could specify in his RFP the things that would accomplish the role, and he wanted something in the IETF. I have asked for his comments on this and he has not replied, so I'm happy to be told I misunderstood him, but I understand him to be saying that the difficulty of getting routers to actually work with his network is something he wants to address.