IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile last call - v4/v6 PDP-contexts and APNs

Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com> Wed, 11 February 2015 11:03 UTC

Return-Path: <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85C4A1A87ED for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 03:03:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.983
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.983 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Jvjz0km7SqWD for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 03:03:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cirse-out.extra.cea.fr (cirse-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.142]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3F031A87BB for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 03:03:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by cirse.extra.cea.fr (8.14.2/8.14.2/CEAnet-Internet-out-2.3) with ESMTP id t1BB30i4003389 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 12:03:00 +0100
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 6AB59203A33 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 12:03:53 +0100 (CET)
Received: from muguet2.intra.cea.fr (muguet2.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.7]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61AE22039F3 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 12:03:53 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (is010446-4.intra.cea.fr [10.8.33.116]) by muguet2.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.2) with ESMTP id t1BB2ak6030876 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Feb 2015 12:03:00 +0100
Message-ID: <54DB36CC.90308@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 12:02:36 +0100
From: Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: v6ops@ietf.org
References: <8B808F0C-1AA8-4ABE-A06E-80652B9C1498@cisco.com> <B7D61F30-BAC4-4BE0-A5FD-1D4BD4652E55@employees.org> <20150129201251.GD34798@Space.Net> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933004902668@OPEXCLILM23.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <20150130103924.GG34798@Space.Net> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933004902889@OPEXCLILM23.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <BF1BDC61-D8BD-4FB3-A111-070D9FF51F60@cisco.com> <6536E263028723489CCD5B6821D4B21303DE865D@UK30S005EXS06.EEAD.EEINT.CO.UK> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933004908DF9@OPEXCLILM23.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <CAKD1Yr1CPecjtSM6iUjgy+0hYJGKbwsiSXL-Rs3EreWXg8bAew@mail.gmail.com> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933004908E6C@OPEXCLILM23.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <CAKD1Yr2D3S3uGYczBmjZ2v06BXYUZRZ-zPbuueouCjTUbwehPA@mail.gmail.com> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933004908F65@OPEXCLILM23.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <CAKD1Yr37-VuiCMDigTxj-dg2J3ne685Qsbg39vM6ad2B=tnYSg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr37-VuiCMDigTxj-dg2J3ne685Qsbg39vM6ad2B=tnYSg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/nwqnVz1hEFKkNOytXNHYFGXMuu0>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile last call - v4/v6 PDP-contexts and APNs
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 11:03:13 -0000

Le 11/02/2015 10:43, Lorenzo Colitti a écrit :
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 12:51 AM, <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
> <mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>> wrote:
>
>     The document was adopted by the WG and passed both the WG and IETF
>     LCs with that scope. I naively assumed that this point is not
>     anymore an issue given that the draft passed major milestones
>     (several WGLCs, IETF LC) and the IETF consensus declared for it
>     means this is not an issue to advance the document.
>
> I think that assumption is incorrect, given Fred's explicit statement on
> this thread, "Before I bother the IESG with it a third time, I’d really
> like to hear a clear consensus, not a rough one."
>
> https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/current/msg21229.html

LEt me try to understand - are we trying to identify consensus?  Or can 
we still discuss the requirements per se?

To me, the latter has its importance as well.

For example:
>    C_REC#1:  In order to allow each operator to select their own
>              strategy regarding IPv6 introduction, the cellular host
>              must support both IPv6 and IPv4v6 PDP-Contexts [TS.23060].
>              Both IPv6 and IPv4v6 PDP-Contexts must be supported.  IPv4,
>              IPv6 or IPv4v6 PDP-Context request acceptance depends on
>              the cellular network configuration.

I would like this requirement to state that _if_ the smartphone sold by 
that operator supports IPv4 PDP-context, IPv6 PDP-context and IPv4v6 
PDP-context then the operator SHOULD support at least IPv4v6 
PDP-context, and ideally the 3 for the same APN; in all cases, the 
operator SHOULD NOT support only IPv6 PDP-Context or only IPv4 
PDP-Context per one APN.

As surprising it might seem, some operators take an approach of 
supporting only IPv6 PDP-Context on one APN, and the other two on other 
two APNs, regardless of the end-user preference; they have their 
particular reasons which may not be technical.  It is very stimulating 
in some sense (IPv6-only), or too daring for some customers which see 
their IPv6 flows interupted if switching to other APN.

Alex

>
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email