Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-enterprise-incremental-ipv6 WGLC

"Templin, Fred L" <> Mon, 05 August 2013 18:56 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18F0621F9DF0 for <>; Mon, 5 Aug 2013 11:56:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.169
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.169 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.170, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z1rcLPnB5YmR for <>; Mon, 5 Aug 2013 11:56:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FC9C21F8F32 for <>; Mon, 5 Aug 2013 11:56:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (localhost.localdomain []) by (8.14.4/8.14.4/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id r75Iv616003072 for <>; Mon, 5 Aug 2013 11:57:06 -0700
Received: from ( []) by (8.14.4/8.14.4/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id r75Iv6PP003069 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=OK); Mon, 5 Aug 2013 11:57:06 -0700
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id; Mon, 5 Aug 2013 11:56:23 -0700
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.011; Mon, 5 Aug 2013 11:56:22 -0700
From: "Templin, Fred L" <>
To: Fred Baker <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-enterprise-incremental-ipv6 WGLC
Thread-Index: AQHOkTyP0j6dQxs+okyfI+7WfZncI5mG7srA
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 18:56:22 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-enterprise-incremental-ipv6 WGLC
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2013 18:56:30 -0000

Hi Fred,

See below for my comments:

Thanks - Fred

1) Suggest going through the document and update any references that
   were once I-Ds but have since been published as RFCs (editorial).

2) Abstract - change: "and potentially an IPv6-only operating mode."
   to: "and eventually an IPv6-only operating mode." ?

3) Throughout the document, the use of "tunnels" seems to generically
   refer to tunnels used for IPv6/IPv4 transition purposes and is used
   in a somewhat negative light. However, IPv6 tunnels will be used in
   enterprises for the long term for other crucial functions.

   To disambiguate, suggest going through the document and change the
   word "tunnels" to "transition tunnels" where this is the intended
   meaning. Also add text similar to the following near the beginning
   of the document:

   "Tunnels used for IPv6/IPv4 transition are expected as near/mid-
    term mechanisms, while IPv6 tunneling will be used for many
    long-term operational purposes such as security, routing control,
    mobility, multi-homing, traffic engineering, etc. We refer to the
    former class of tunnels as "transition tunnels".

4) Section 4.3, end of third paragraph, add the sentence:

   "For example, mobility management functions will be needed to
    accommodate handovers between diverse access technologies."

5) Section 4.3, add a final paragraph such as:

   "Enterprise networks more and more include virtual networks where
    a single physical node may host many virtualized addressable devices.
    It is imperative that the addressing plans assigned to these virtual
    networks and devices be consistent and non-overlapping with the
    addresses assigned to real networks and nodes. For example, a
    virtual network established within an isolated lab environment
    may at a later time become attached to the production enterprise

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [] On Behalf
> Of Fred Baker
> Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2013 11:00 AM
> To:
> Subject: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-enterprise-incremental-ipv6 WGLC
> This is to initiate a two week working group last call of
> ipv6.  Please read it now. If you find nits
> (spelling errors, minor suggested wording changes, etc), comment to the
> authors; if you find greater issues, such as disagreeing with a
> statement or finding additional issues that need to be addressed,
> please post your comments to the list.
> We are looking specifically for comments on the importance of the
> document as well as its content. If you have read the document and
> believe it to be of operational utility, that is also an important
> comment to make.
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list