IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] FW: 6rd sunsetting requirements for 6204-bis

"Hemant Singh (shemant)" <shemant@cisco.com> Mon, 23 April 2012 19:15 UTC

Return-Path: <shemant@cisco.com>
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 8341C21F85A3 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Apr 2012 12:15:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.298
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.298 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 h-Xbczu35VnU for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Apr 2012 12:15:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.86.76]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A141D21F859F for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Apr 2012 12:15:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=shemant@cisco.com; l=6733; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1335208528; x=1336418128; h=mime-version:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: references:from:to:cc; bh=lRhUHhaSKJRMkgLbAYJsS5DI7eL8GlD/aa+v1tvQQj8=; b=KYi6hYaDtZ1jfrX15efl+3mxtmSDUn6S8fsyX99jgxDB6g+JEpX9zgIU K5LYMhMs8nNcctJshoPb9l2zbz6EecsZTAvf7T4CgFjwUEYrWeZcYSmUw o9vC0lWSRE5SVpP0K6YHsc+SUodFBMU4xFB6+5VBA8hy7NBBp8boER5vl g=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAFACWplU+tJV2Y/2dsb2JhbABEgkavF4EHggkBAQEEEgEJEQNJDAQCAQgRBAEBCwYXAQYBRQgBCAEBBBMIARmHbQuaNqArineFdWMEiGObbIFpgweBPg
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.75,468,1330905600"; d="scan'208,217"; a="77121106"
Received: from rcdn-core-1.cisco.com ([173.37.93.152]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 23 Apr 2012 19:15:28 +0000
Received: from xbh-rcd-102.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-102.cisco.com [72.163.62.139]) by rcdn-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q3NJFSwP002962; Mon, 23 Apr 2012 19:15:28 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-109.cisco.com ([72.163.62.151]) by xbh-rcd-102.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 23 Apr 2012 14:15:27 -0500
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CD2185.70DEE98A"
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 14:15:26 -0500
Message-ID: <5B6B2B64C9FE2A489045EEEADDAFF2C304837261@XMB-RCD-109.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <4F95A3D9.1010100@viagenie.ca>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: FW: [v6ops] 6rd sunsetting requirements for 6204-bis
Thread-Index: Ac0hgZhuvm2IexdOQfywfRl7nr23WQAAV7qw
References: <5B6B2B64C9FE2A489045EEEADDAFF2C30483722C@XMB-RCD-109.cisco.com> <4F95A3D9.1010100@viagenie.ca>
From: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" <shemant@cisco.com>
To: Simon Perreault <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Apr 2012 19:15:27.0551 (UTC) FILETIME=[711A04F0:01CD2185]
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [v6ops] FW: 6rd sunsetting requirements for 6204-bis
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: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 19:15:30 -0000

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Simon Perreault [mailto:simon.perreault@viagenie.ca] 
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2012 2:48 PM
To: Hemant Singh (shemant)
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org
Subject: Re: FW: [v6ops] 6rd sunsetting requirements for 6204-bis

 

>It's a bug according to which RFC?

 

Do you really think an RFC would specify router behavior for concurrent
operation of a GRE tunnel, native IPv6, and native IPv4 operations on a
router?  There are Enterprise and network access edge routers shipping
for ages where concurrent tunneled and native IP on the router works
just fine with specific configuration on the router.  

 

The bigger question for the CPE router is, soon as the CPE supports
concurrent operation of native IPv6 and 6rd, how is the CPE FIB and RIB
supposed to work?  There is no specification out there in RFC form that
covers the operations insides the CPE for the FIB and the RIB.  MarkT
and Ole have a draft (draft-townsley-troan-ipv6-ce-transitioning-02)
that has started the work with a SourcreRIB and DestRIB.  However, this
work is incomplete. See an email I sent to v6ops on 03/24/2012 with my
review of draft-townsley-troan-ipv6-ce-transitioning-02.

 

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/current/msg12496.html

 

We are putting the cart before the horse if we include Mark's new
requirements from today into rfc6204bis.

 

Hemant

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email