Re: [v6ops] draft-binet-v6ops-cellular-host-requirements-00.txt

[Hesham Soliman <[e-mail]>]

I made several comments on this document and are all included in Lorenzo's
comments below. Therefore I'm of the same opinion regarding WG adoption.

Hesham

-----Original Message-----
From: Lorenzo Colitti <[e-mail]>
Date: Monday, 19 November 2012 7:39 PM
To: <[e-mail]>
Cc: IPv6 Ops WG <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-binet-v6ops-cellular-host-requirements-00.txt

>I do not think this document is ready for WG adoption.
>
>To start with, I see a few general issues.
>
>First, the document is attempting to standardize behaviours that are
>already standardized by 3GPP. This is leads to many of the requirements
>being redundant because they are already included in 3GPP specs. If the
>manufacturer is violating those specs already, I doubt that an RFC that
>says "don't violate those specs" is going to have any effect at all. This
>also presents the problem that if the 3GPP standards are updated, the
>text becomes out of date.
>
>Second, most of this document attempts to standardize feature sets, not
>protocols or interoperability. I'm not sure this is is in scope for the
>IETF, and even more so for an operations group inside the IETF.
>
>Third, IETF work is supposed to proceed in parallel with running code,
>not in the absence of running code. I very doubt there are two
>interoperable implementations that satisfy all these requirements
>(actually, I doubt that any real implementation satisfies even half of
>them). Attempting to specify these requirements will not change that.
>
>
>Moving on, at least these requirements are redundant and should be
>removed or replaced by a reference to the appropriate specs:
>
>
>REQ#3: Redundant with 3GPP specs.
>REQ#4: Redundant with 3GPP specs.
>REQ#5: Redundant with 3GPP specs.
>REQ#6: Redundant with IPv6 node requirements.
>REQ#7: Redundant with IPv6 node requirements.
>REQ#7: Redundant with IPv6 node requirements and 3GPP specs.
>
>REQ#15: Redundant with RFC 6724.
>REQ#17: Redundant with 3GPP specs.
>
>
>
>A few specific comments as well:
>
>REQ#1: why do you need to cite RFC 5952? It has nothing to do with
>connecting to cellular networks, and it's already in RFC 6434 (IPv6 Node
>Requirements).
>
>
>REQ#10: Not clear what happens if more than one provisioning method
>provides DNS. Should the phone just information from one of them? Or
>should it list all of them in priority order?
>
>REQ#11: Not clear to me what this means. I understand the "implement the
>NAT64 discovery heuristic" requirement, but not the part that references
>RFC 6052. What does the host need to implement from RFC 6052?
>
>
>REQ#18: Meaningless. Saying "MAY" in a requirements document is no better
>than saying nothing.
>
>REQ#25: What is the point of supporting RFC 5175 if it defines no new
>flags?
>
>REQ#27: Why support DHCPv6 PD if no mobile networks will support it for a
>number of years?
>
>REQ#28: Duplicate of #12.
>
>On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 10:47 PM,  <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>Dear all,
>
>As discussed in the v6ops meeting, we re-submitted a new version of the
>text which does not update RFC3316.
>
>We hope this new version is ready for the WG adoption.
>
>Cheers,
>Med
>
>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]]
>De la part de [e-mail]
>
>
>
>
>Envoyé : lundi 12 novembre 2012 07:42
>À : [e-mail]
>Objet : I-D Action: draft-binet-v6ops-cellular-host-requirements-00.txt
>
>
>A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
>directories.
>
>
>        Title           : Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Requirements
>for Cellular Hosts
>        Author(s)       : David Binet
>                          Mohamed Boucadair
>                          Ales Vizdal
>                          Cameron Byrne
>                          Gang Chen
>        Filename        :
>draft-binet-v6ops-cellular-host-requirements-00.txt
>        Pages           : 15
>        Date            : 2012-11-11
>
>Abstract:
>   This document lists a set of IPv6-related requirements to be
>   supported by cellular hosts.
>
>
>
>The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-binet-v6ops-cellular-host-requireme
>nts
>
>There's also a htmlized version available at:
>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-binet-v6ops-cellular-host-requirements-00
>
>
>Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>
>_______________________________________________
>I-D-Announce mailing list
>[e-mail]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
>Internet-Draft 
><https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announceInternet-Draft>
>directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
>or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
>_______________________________________________
>v6ops mailing list
>[e-mail]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>v6ops mailing list
>[e-mail]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops