[v6ops] Re: Call For Adoption: draft-link-v6ops-6mops

Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com> Fri, 09 August 2024 21:08 UTC

Return-Path: <furry13@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 394EEC151075 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:08:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.855
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.855 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qzk3oFKooETq for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:08:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x22d.google.com (mail-lj1-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5F491C14F721 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 9 Aug 2024 14:08:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x22d.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2f15790b472so30930351fa.0 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 09 Aug 2024 14:08:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1723237713; x=1723842513; darn=ietf.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=8sGCvksTv4XqOvdoofM921ucwEEowtZubkeeT41YtMo=; b=fQVCTSxNch5u4xxTu11GYkZXN+efoYKH62rW5MFGs1ccqRs+PuPCthhxfbMDpHLY6g RtzNXmmKbi3LWEQ/JYsfJNuyz9L++cGyCBz/JhWPpSBpM5yApigzpmsqwd7HJgsw092n yVl2++cWikYC9kky0vyZqSAq8WYHguQExyHQwwNKqKgyfItytVyyw8FqeiM1HnaVLEqs PQB/CIlONhL0llIr18kYfpM+l4iIqT/jN/g65iJe9J+bq68/ig2aTtYJrSDHaQPYopjM 1W+rqxFdEZXM1TMUsHJXcEmSNrKLJ7FT6R9wa9VftZGLOKU92TMm8g61iPm/FqO+AgtC sDZw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1723237713; x=1723842513; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=8sGCvksTv4XqOvdoofM921ucwEEowtZubkeeT41YtMo=; b=uyepBLxE/hylUes7YHcI1u025SJlv23wT1t8sPFa8Q3YFuTOaljrJDAh9weAqBNOlt 4weW+HVNq80Tj+ziAySQ1/70aNcI0IP8wVclfH1jGosY4RgFLhjiWKnJGgkiEges7J7Y LX7P5buKj7/beV1PMJZYp0MLM+YhkobdKB3GILbrVWq28YWFMRZBJECxCuYkCX31IYv6 DpJiVgWtBKtybCCpzGR1nfTMTWGviUIdH18w+jOI8ecWHKCu+L4LrGIMNSr4Fz2XmtXv B+91HXCWt0g8SK8YeT5MRV+INcJ98eyyxmCSPdKbY/G6jHT4mWK5EhbaP4l/jmVB8x8u 4+bw==
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUaqWqJEU1ADAzt0RiTxhw+cy4jjcEot6R4kuFahDNt4QzNrWmx/slFMAGz4Wd6r1rdtqzo+NhMtG2hoJU6WA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwwWjg4bdSDWHSfOFALo3NiEROGOngzxjnWrxDhFWeIYh6T8xha sIvlonQRizuy1bjZEO6fBeI6+GibAsGtO6lr01O24gCbDsLx/UuvAskJQPuTgpy9SvYy070HOig tsJvAaNScgngczvdhXvnWGHaEqrA=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEZRI5lui8VguCetcu8U6djRBQPg0Cm+SQ53sRgqaUDcQOCAx/iHroDys5J+Exf6Qi+bf3FAgr9AoZzdZC0Uo8=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:809:0:b0:2ef:2f37:345b with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2f1a6cf56f8mr20189621fa.30.1723237713001; Fri, 09 Aug 2024 14:08:33 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <BL0PR05MB5316B10BC93B52412415EC79AEBE2@BL0PR05MB5316.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <CAFU7BAS7Wez2o=56gOd8OmHHCi6CbopoAsk7jAWUWdZ1FADdag@mail.gmail.com> <001801dae97e$53ef6540$fbce2fc0$@tsinghua.org.cn>
In-Reply-To: <001801dae97e$53ef6540$fbce2fc0$@tsinghua.org.cn>
From: Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2024 07:08:21 +1000
Message-ID: <CAFU7BAQC-=ZU2rggu23rdt5MdWiNymj5EsRmTyS2k=pJhsCfAg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Aijun Wang <wangaijun@tsinghua.org.cn>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID-Hash: XBDNJH6DWEJWJFDFX3RNCFYBGZTKAZ4C
X-Message-ID-Hash: XBDNJH6DWEJWJFDFX3RNCFYBGZTKAZ4C
X-MailFrom: furry13@gmail.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-v6ops.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: Ron Bonica <rbonica=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>, v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [v6ops] Re: Call For Adoption: draft-link-v6ops-6mops
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/Gat0ihZ7pR0ZTf2Hgd5LcdBIp_8>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:v6ops-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:v6ops-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:v6ops-leave@ietf.org>

Hi Aijun,

On Thu, Aug 8, 2024 at 8:33 PM Aijun Wang <wangaijun@tsinghua.org.cn> wrote:
> It seems that the newly

RFC8925 was published almost 4 years ago, so not so newly ;)

>assigned name "IPv6-Mostly network" may lead confusion or need more explanations to the customers.
> How about change the document name solely to "Deployment and Operations Consideration on IPv6-Only Network", and omit the introduction of new concept of "IPv6-Mostly network"?

I do not think it's a good idea. In my network I have network segments
which are really IPv6-only (no DHCP, no IPv4 addresses assigned to the
router's interfaces, and in some cases even onlink IPv4 communication
is blocked). But this document is not about that kind of deployment,
it's about deploying a network where some endpoints are IPv6-only (do
not have IPv4 addresses), some are dual-stack and some could even be
IPv4-only - and all those clients co-exist on the same network
segment.
We need a term to identify such deployments, to differentiate them
from 'IPv6-only, no IPv4 at all at the network level' model.
When we were working on RFC8925, we did discuss the terminology for a
while, and 'IPv6-mostly' was the best one we came up with.
I guess we can talk about a better term but I've noticed this one
getting popular..

> And, for the operator transit to IPv6-Only network, besides the C2S(client to server) communication, the C2C(client to client) communication requirement should also need to be addressed. It seems the document is lack of consideration for such part.

Do you mean peer2peer onlink communication, within the same segment?

> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: forwardingalgorithm@ietf.org [mailto:forwardingalgorithm@ietf.org] 代表 Jen Linkova
> 发送时间: 2024年8月5日 22:22
> 收件人: Ron Bonica <rbonica=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org>
> 抄送: v6ops@ietf.org
> 主题: [v6ops] Re: Call For Adoption: draft-link-v6ops-6mops
>
> The draft can be found at
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-link-v6ops-6mops/
>
> On Mon, Aug 5, 2024 at 11:21 PM Ron Bonica <rbonica=40juniper.net@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> >
> > Friends,
> >
> > This message begins a Call For Adoption for draft-link-v6ops-6mops. Please read the draft and send your comments in response to this email.
> >
> > The call for adoption will close on August 19, 2024.
> >
> >                                                               Ron
> >
> >
> >
> > Juniper Business Use Only
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > v6ops mailing list -- v6ops@ietf.org
> > To unsubscribe send an email to v6ops-leave@ietf.org
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers, Jen Linkova
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list -- v6ops@ietf.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to v6ops-leave@ietf.org
>


-- 
Cheers, Jen Linkova