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

Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com> Sat, 17 June 2017 23:07 UTC

Return-Path: <fredbaker.ietf@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 004141243F6 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 17 Jun 2017 16:07:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zoEsa2N8aCUU for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 17 Jun 2017 16:07:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi0-x229.google.com (mail-oi0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E77281242F7 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sat, 17 Jun 2017 16:07:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi0-x229.google.com with SMTP id k145so39424360oih.3 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sat, 17 Jun 2017 16:07:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=tYxXHhChHwKR8wZ66eTitO4NX74aYDnDfUhtacjN0to=; b=m+KjdY2+8OlSwVi9h7mqrw+uijgCTRauH3RbtiGC1kfAnQw6CLXpMGwNZ1zcYIxoST oWJ5roHNREd/C6LwLpHqZQRVn8ImAM2c0uUraV7lxguwkWyJ5L7Ai0LnL+PYdL4vm3Vd p0C6aJHID+o4a9Q4IyO4pN0Ied+LFm8mljtGsnLb5qo0S81IUIIKsHpq4O28ALEJ5Q6t eTqg5oYoIgQ+cAswRhev/6YQmUVu7sNldA6Kw3wHESRXc2tkeWMBWkybd9tikk/BhxLj P9llKxDH5eHhdiDNxWZZzP9Q6TBHHOBuGytJ5Bf3RxX9yZH/x3R1alYLm/eCj9bMQdT1 +www==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=tYxXHhChHwKR8wZ66eTitO4NX74aYDnDfUhtacjN0to=; b=UAVOtLx2RhL01BvmqQ69ZbY34I1aLNpd6vNJvcW4025uPgsV0AFhV3lkmiWd4Znupv vQdViYORwb3Tpslg7ryG7ub58fXy7vYUPbb1GqDNDeqHGFVYfAJwZgh3XvV7xTOlIoNI YUNowb9FwKSeoR7GraS56QZYFzLdAkQzrpoz/iikUOuWBno7HauLNnetdXLFbicTmZAG L835yWRjsZHWS6NZQr5Cjkky2mtoCJZVglaMgqyfCT0Jh+npQEvsQeSaVBe0hpvknadr gvfdJyaimFQqFomXtpYES0vYaKRl+K9BMI54l8FKuuXFA1FskA9YbsVXPcjBfOMJgb6z rPSA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKS2vOzPIzxO27yFuIC6rIjn0Rvz5jwq7nV6HFBYHyhlW/V8ehpxX1DZ HVKlHWsAgWR/ClVt3xw=
X-Received: by 10.202.104.84 with SMTP id d81mr7452248oic.42.1497740825302; Sat, 17 Jun 2017 16:07:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2600:8802:5600:1e::16e5? ([2600:8802:5600:1e::16e5]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 34sm3327158otw.55.2017.06.17.16.07.03 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 17 Jun 2017 16:07:04 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
From: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <549B57F3-A07B-4964-895E-C9AD962A5AD4@consulintel.es>
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2017 16:07:02 -0700
Cc: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <9D6D2A35-769A-4CF4-8214-0401969DF8A0@gmail.com>
References: <149773408722.14141.1243099989313191246.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <334ACBB6-C438-410B-81D7-49269AC51004@gmail.com> <549B57F3-A07B-4964-895E-C9AD962A5AD4@consulintel.es>
To: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/R63ga89OIPqQyGucNg_HPop3suY>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] New Version Notification for draft-baker-v6ops-cpe-autoconfigure-00.txt
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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 Jun 2017 23:07:08 -0000

In which case 7084-bis could refer to it. I tend to worry about having a requirements document go into algorithms, which this does (I think it's an obvious algorithm that doesn't need spelled out, but nobody seems to have realized that when they did their implementations).

And the draft is probably imperfect in some way.

> On Jun 17, 2017, at 2:53 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@consulintel.es> wrote:
> 
> Hi Fred,
> 
> I just read the document and I think is something needed.
> 
> In fact, it should be one requirement to be a should or must in the RFC7084-bis. Not sure if others agree and if there is some way to “sync” a reference in the RFC7084-bis with an individual I-D (I got an input previously to remove that), until it becomes an RFC (if approved), or it means “holding” it …
> 
> Of course, if there is no opposition in the WG, this may be approved and go to the last call quicker than the RFC7084-bis, so not being an issue.
> 
> Regards,
> Jordi
> 
> 
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: v6ops <v6ops-bounces@ietf.org> en nombre de Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
> Responder a: <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
> Fecha: sábado, 17 de junio de 2017, 23:21
> Para: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
> Asunto: Re: [v6ops] New Version Notification for draft-baker-v6ops-cpe-autoconfigure-00.txt
> 
>    In discussion with John Brzozowski, he expressed a concern that CPEs don't come "out of the box preconfigured for IPv6" as they often do for IPv4. I had a recent experience with a new router at my home that made the point in my mind; IPv6 was an "advanced configuration", and the difference between "auto-configure" and "auto-detect" was a little lost on me. 
> 
>    So I have a question. Do we need to spell this out for CPE vendors? I have spliced together a draft on the topic. I'd welcome comments that might improve it, especially if I have something egregiously wrong. Second, I'm curious whether the working group thinks we need this.
> 
>    Your thoughts?
> 
> 
>> On Jun 17, 2017, at 2:14 PM, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> A new version of I-D, draft-baker-v6ops-cpe-autoconfigure-00.txt
>> has been successfully submitted by Fred Baker and posted to the
>> IETF repository.
>> 
>> Name:		draft-baker-v6ops-cpe-autoconfigure
>> Revision:	00
>> Title:		Requirements for a Zero-Configuration IPv6 CPE
>> Document date:	2017-06-17
>> Group:		Individual Submission
>> Pages:		6
>> URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-baker-v6ops-cpe-autoconfigure-00.txt
>> Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-baker-v6ops-cpe-autoconfigure/
>> Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-baker-v6ops-cpe-autoconfigure-00
>> Htmlized:       https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-baker-v6ops-cpe-autoconfigure-00
>> 
>> 
>> Abstract:
>>  This note is a breif exploration of what is required for a CPE to be
>>  auto-configurable from the perspective on an ISP or other upstream
>>  network.  It assumes that the CPE may also be IPv4-capable (probably
>>  using NAPT), but that the requirements for that are well understood
>>  and need no further specification.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>> 
>> The IETF Secretariat
>> 
> 
>    _______________________________________________
>    v6ops mailing list
>    v6ops@ietf.org
>    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 use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops