Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-anderson-v6ops-siit-dc-01.txt

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

Tore,

One substantive comment first, followed by a nit.

The substantive comment is on the positioning of your proposal. Basically
I think it is a Good Thing to describe this solution, and its pros and
cons. But I still think that for many established operators it's not yet
clear that it's the best choice. So I think that

(a) Appendix B.4 (Dual Stack) should cite RFC 6883 as a full exploration
of the dual stack option. It does after all contain a hidden reference to
your draft: "Some ICPs who already have satisfactory operational experience
with IPv6 might consider an IPv6-only strategy, with IPv4 clients being
supported by translation or proxy in front of their IPv6 content servers."

(b) I also think the first lines of1.1 (Motivation and Goals) are a bit too
much like opinion - ultimately it should be each operator's choice what
they do. Rather than deconstructing your text, I suggest the following
friendly amendment:

   Historically, dual stack [RFC4213] [RFC6883] has been the recommended way to
   transition from an IPv4-only environment to one capable of serving
   IPv6 users.  However, for data centre operators and Internet content
   providers, dual stack operation has a number of disadvantages
   compared to single stack operation.  In particular, running two
   protocols rather than one results in increased complexity and
   operational overhead, with a very low expected return on investment
   in the short to medium term while few end-users only have connectivity
   to the IPv6 Internet.  Furthermore, the dual stack approach does not
   in any way help with the depletion of the IPv4 address space.

   Therefore, some operators may prefer an approach in which they only
   need to operate one protocol in the data centre as they prepare for
   the future.  The design goals are:

Nit:

Something very strange has happened in these two references:

10.2. Informative References


   [I-D.anderson-v6ops-siit-dc-2xlat]
              tore, t., "SIIT-DC: Dual Translation Mode", draft-
              anderson-v6ops-siit-dc-2xlat-00 (work in progress),
              September 2014.

   [I-D.gont-6man-deprecate-atomfrag-generation]
              Gont, F., Will, W., and t. tore, "Deprecating the
              Generation of IPv6 Atomic Fragments", draft-gont-6man-
              deprecate-atomfrag-generation-01 (work in progress),
              August 2014.
Regards
   Brian