Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile last call- "harmfully broad"?

<> Thu, 19 February 2015 13:03 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65D1C1A802E for <>; Thu, 19 Feb 2015 05:03:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qeee6wYanoBL for <>; Thu, 19 Feb 2015 05:03:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A40C01A1B2E for <>; Thu, 19 Feb 2015 05:03:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from (unknown [xx.xx.xx.3]) by (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 1E73418C2BB; Thu, 19 Feb 2015 14:03:35 +0100 (CET)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme2.itn.ftgroup (unknown []) by (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id E63684C076; Thu, 19 Feb 2015 14:03:34 +0100 (CET)
Received: from OPEXCLILM23.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([]) by OPEXCLILMA1.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::95e2:eb4b:3053:fabf%35]) with mapi id 14.03.0224.002; Thu, 19 Feb 2015 14:03:34 +0100
From: <>
To: Lorenzo Colitti <>, Dave Michaud <>
Thread-Topic: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile last call- "harmfully broad"?
Thread-Index: AQHQTEHyixBJZ1L350WogIuKXDMPO5z37j1A
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2015 13:03:34 +0000
Message-ID: <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93300490E580@OPEXCLILM23.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
References: <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B9330049091C2@OPEXCLILM23.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <> <> <> <6536E263028723489CCD5B6821D4B21303DEA706@UK30S005EXS06.EEAD.EEINT.CO.UK> <> <> <> <6536E263028723489CCD5B6821D4B21303E07EE2@UK30S005EXS06.EEAD.EEINT.CO.UK> <> <> <6536E263028723489CCD5B6821D4B21303E088AE@UK30S005EXS06.EEAD.EEINT.CO.UK> <> <26150_1424277597_54E4C05D_26150_800_1_A729C0B3952BEE45A1AA136ADD556BE80493F147@OPEXCLILM23.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <> <fdc7ab8c-4f63-43eb-a77b-4764f24d9486@OPEXCLILH01.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93300490E580OPEXCLILM23corp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-PMX-Version:, Antispam-Engine:, Antispam-Data: 2014.12.22.190922
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "IPv6 Ops WG \(\)" <>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile last call- "harmfully broad"?
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2015 13:03:39 -0000


Please see inline.


De : Lorenzo Colitti []
Envoyé : jeudi 19 février 2015 13:46
À : Dave Michaud
Objet : Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile last call- "harmfully broad"?

On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 9:31 PM, Dave Michaud <<>> wrote:
This is directly in line with the v6ops charter:

The IPv6 Operations Working Group (v6ops) develops guidelines for the
operation of a shared IPv4/IPv6 Internet and provides operational
guidance on how to deploy IPv6 into existing IPv4-only networks,
as well as into new network installations.

The main focus of the v6ops WG is to look at the immediate
deployment issues; more advanced stages of deployment and transition
are a lower priority.

Actually, it isn't, really. The charter is operational guidance for the IPv4/IPv6 Internet. Not host requirements.

[Med] Hummm… I suggest you have a quick look at this page : (hint: search for ‘host’ or ‘CPE’).

In fact, if you look at the numbered list in the charter, the items are "identify operational issues and determine solutions", "identify potential security risks", "identify portions of the specs that can cause operational concerns", and "analyze solutions for deploying IPv6 within network environments". None of those cover this document.

[Med] Is this a joke? Your assertion is erroneous. I will take one item randomly from the I-D to illustrate the first item in your list:

   C_REC#7:  Because of potential operational deficiencies to be
             experienced in some roaming situations, the cellular host
             must be able to be configured with a home PDP-Context
             type(s) and a roaming PDP-Context type(s).  The purpose of
             the of the roaming profile is to limit the PDP type(s)
             requested by the cellular host when out of the home
             network.  Note that distinct PDP type(s) and APN(s) can be
             configured for home and roaming cases.