[v6ops] 464XLAT and the term "architecture" -- WAS draft-464XLAT not a "trial deployment report"

[Cameron Byrne <[e-mail]>]

New title to focus on the taxonomy and term "architecture"

On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 1:44 PM, Victor Kuarsingh
<[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>
> On 12-02-19 2:23 PM, "Brian E Carpenter" <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>

<snip>

>>I do object slightly to the way draft-ietf-v6ops-464xlat uses
>>the word "architecture". It's an operational scenario, not an
>>architecture, IMHO.
>
> Are you concerned that the use of "architecture" may be interpreted as
> protocol architecture vs. network architecture?  IMHO, I would suggest
> what's in the document reflects a network/deployment architecture (my
> opinion).
>
> Perhaps authors can clarify what they meant.
>

Gladly.

I will call on the TOGAF definitions:

http://pubs.opengroup.org/architecture/togaf9-doc/arch/chap03.html#tag_03_08

Architecture:

   1)    A formal description of a system, or a detailed plan of the
system at component level, to guide its implementation (source:
ISO/IEC 42010:2007).
    2)  The structure of components, their inter-relationships, and
the principles and guidelines governing their design and evolution
over time.

I believe the 464XLAT draft fits pretty well in this definition.  We
look to describe the system, guide implementation, and show how the
pieces fit together.

I believe the term framework is too broad (but close) and solution and
scenario are too specific for the context of this draft to cover both
wireline and wireless.  In a few cases, for example address assignment
to the CPE / UE and Pref64/n discovery, we supply multiple methods
that the desired outcome can be achieved to accommodate and not limit
how 464XLAT can be applied now and in the future.

We took care to not be overly prescriptive in defining how a network
operator shall design their network.  One of the key values we believe
publishing the draft will bring is the ability to describe succinctly
yet generically how traffic is treated in a 464XLAT network so that
all parties (software, hardware, application, peers...) can have a
common understanding of the network capabilities and the way in which
traffic will be treated.

CB