IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-dhc-pd-exclude

Vízdal Aleš <ales.vizdal@t-mobile.cz> Thu, 08 December 2011 09:57 UTC

Return-Path: <ales.vizdal@t-mobile.cz>
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 DFC4C21F8B0B for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Dec 2011 01:57:58 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.702
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.702 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.248, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_CZ=0.445, HOST_EQ_CZ=0.904, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id p9dBiFCohukL for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Dec 2011 01:57:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailhub1.t-mobile.cz (mailhub1.t-mobile.cz [62.141.0.149]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35D2B21F867F for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Dec 2011 01:57:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from srvhk504.rdm.cz (unknown [10.246.143.96]) by mailhub1.t-mobile.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0D58285832; Thu, 8 Dec 2011 10:57:53 +0100 (CET)
Received: from SRVHKE02.rdm.cz ([fe80::94ce:8456:f6fa:86a8]) by srvhk504.rdm.cz ([fe80::506:b9a6:d353:9494%12]) with mapi; Thu, 8 Dec 2011 10:57:53 +0100
From: Vízdal Aleš <ales.vizdal@t-mobile.cz>
To: jouni korhonen <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>, Hemant Singh <shemant@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2011 10:57:56 +0100
Thread-Topic: [v6ops] draft-ietf-dhc-pd-exclude
Thread-Index: Acy0rcGjdEw4bWiXQW2opG1RBZVTjAA3gCKQ
Message-ID: <1808340F7EC362469DDFFB112B37E2FCC5E99F82D1@SRVHKE02.rdm.cz>
References: <CAF26956.183598%wbeebee@cisco.com> <CAKD1Yr2fpp88J5XX=41TQd+SmZgF+k_GJY_ePE9UpTPkqB_fSg@mail.gmail.com> <748E8EFF-BA36-42EF-A58A-C34FD8566E69@employees.org> <CAKD1Yr3+V33Tzx-9pT_RrG-ZicwROqwBr8n2k6N-14HSfrw8-w@mail.gmail.com> <591FE292-8D53-4C86-BFB1-71F0EF78A182@employees.org> <CAKD1Yr03UcyqAOw+zZ6yo98epMdAE1VZx4buqNN6wXNS9AYUrw@mail.gmail.com> <399AFFDF-5400-497A-9F47-C3C4519325B8@employees.org> <CAKD1Yr0Xm6cY3SmxweM0E4vNy40eHDAmsZNZ6_9A=p_aX70rYA@mail.gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr3HgecxhqWf89_uZt6yew-RLR=XfgM1zdaOq5HDzOUt3g@mail.gmail.com> <5B6B2B64C9FE2A489045EEEADDAFF2C303778431@XMB-RCD-109.cisco.com> <CAKD1Yr3qouFbJ1Zpi+qW7z7EophdVsd3uWJrQFKmQhnwMLyOJA@mail.gmail.com> <5B6B2B64C9FE2A489045EEEADDAFF2C303778599@XMB-RCD-109.cisco.com><88DA53CA-338E-4574-84AA-DAB8A2599187@steffann.nl><4EDA80AC.6030907@globis.net><435BDEA7-5582-418A-842A-607A37FDE96C@nominum.com>, <4EDA8DF0.7000803@globis.net><6F36EB9D-258A-4B08-903D-759746393F6D@nominum.com> <4EDAA849.40208@globis.net> < 5B6B2B64C9FE2A489045EEEADDAFF2C3037785BB@XMB-RCD-109.cisco.com> <D015FA6A-DBD9-4959-82F9-B23DCCE8FFA2@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <D015FA6A-DBD9-4959-82F9-B23DCCE8FFA2@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>, Ray Hunter <v6ops@globis.net>, "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-dhc-pd-exclude
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 08 Dec 2011 09:57:59 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: v6ops-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of jouni
> korhonen
> Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2011 7:59 AM
> To: Hemant Singh
> Cc: Thomas Narten; Ray Hunter; v6ops@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-dhc-pd-exclude
> 
> Hemant,
> 
> On Dec 4, 2011, at 1:59 AM, Hemant Singh (shemant) wrote:
> 
> > It's high time the subject of the email changed to the pd-exclude document rather
> than the rfc6204bis document for which the ship has sailed to include the pd-exclude
> in.   That said, one question I had was this.   How are network interfaces
> 
> IMHO it is too early to state that the ship has sailed for RFC6204bis already.

[snip]

+1

What is preventing pd-exclude to be referenced in the 6240bis draft?

The consequence of pd-exclude not being considered will result in a safe mode
operation mode in the scenarios relying on pd-exclude (e.g. Prefix Delegation in 3GPP) 
where the customer will be allocated a prefix, but just a half (the one excluding /64 used for 
the wan link) of it will be delegated to be compliant with RFC3633.

Is it wise ignoring this consequence?
What needs to be done for the support of pd-exclude in the draft?

Ales

> - JOuni
> 
> 
> >
> > Hemant
> >
> 
> [snip]

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email