Re: [v6ops] draft-wbeebee-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-bis - where to go from here

["Don Sturek" <[e-mail]>]

Hi James,

Question:  Who then addresses routed subscriber networks and prefix
delegation in the HAN?   

I think these topics need to be addressed someplace before internetworked
CPEs are deployed and the topic becomes a major oversight.  For our
application (Smart Energy) we already have groups like WiFi, HomePlug and
HomeGrid planning exactly such deployments next year.

Don


-----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of
james woodyatt
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2011 2:36 PM
To: IPv6 Ops WG
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-wbeebee-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-bis - where to go
from here

On Mar 1, 2011, at 2:15 PM, Daniel Roesen wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 06:54:01AM +0000, Fred Baker wrote:
>> What do people want to see happen in
draft-wbeebee-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-bis?
> 
> Speaking with an operator point of view: get the areas it covers
> polished up as quickly as possible and get it out of the door as RFC so
> we can start pointing vendors to it. [...]

It's not currently on the agenda for IETF 80.  Do the authors plan to ask
the working group to adopt it?  I hope they update it to remove sections
5.4, 5.5 and 5.9 before they do that.  (Amend the figure in section 4, too.)
Otherwise, I predict, the draft will be more contentious than operators
probably want it to be.  If you want it published quickly, then get rid of
all the talk about routed subscriber networks and prefix delegation on the
LAN.


--
james woodyatt <[e-mail]>
member of technical staff, core os networking



_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops