IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-shishio-v6ops-dpvt

Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> Wed, 27 February 2013 13:56 UTC

Return-Path: <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
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 C981721F852C for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 05:56:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5QdoHait62qa for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 05:56:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6DA021F85BB for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 05:56:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r1RDuBs6021454 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 13:56:11 GMT
X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk r1RDuBs6021454
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=ecs.soton.ac.uk; s=200903; t=1361973371; bh=c/peBaPPQ0gdtpdJyOS65ElyVBU=; h=From:Mime-Version:Subject:Date:References:To:In-Reply-To; b=EP7d/mAzCI+inu736iwQ3n5deha9d4jPu80mWpF182KfsS2uv2CTpQBNX0olrGMEf mVWQR8sdTLx9noSdR0MqZtONEq6xg4QWRJIWBZ0TGU/iMA5dihgwSdJwOI6vIqv3AU 7/4p30H/0EQYUYWoiEDpOcpOP6QMwkz8uDECPDnI=
Received: from gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk ([2001:630:d0:f102:250:56ff:fea0:401]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102:250:56ff:fea0:68da]) envelope-from <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> with ESMTP (valid=N/A) id p1QDuB0430612981aj ret-id none; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 13:56:11 +0000
Received: from ip-161-146.eduroam.soton.ac.uk (ip-161-146.eduroam.soton.ac.uk [152.78.161.146]) (authenticated bits=0) by gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r1RDu9IZ018204 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Feb 2013 13:56:10 GMT
From: Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_5F95A5EB-1317-423E-8940-52FDB3677746"
Message-ID: <EMEW3|5ffbf5e1937e4f456bb7edd71daeafe2p1QDuB03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|8D032AC7-F73D-4FFE-9605-CE135EE6A3AE@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\))
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 13:56:15 +0000
References: <BD87928F6BFAEF4EBEB883E1C4F58772340501C6@PACDCEXMB01.cable.comcast.com> <8D032AC7-F73D-4FFE-9605-CE135EE6A3AE@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: v6ops@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <BD87928F6BFAEF4EBEB883E1C4F58772340501C6@PACDCEXMB01.cable.comcast.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499)
X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
X-smtpf-Report: sid=p1QDuB043061298100; tid=p1QDuB0430612981aj; client=relay,forged,no_ptr,ipv6; mail=; rcpt=; nrcpt=1:0; fails=0
X-ECS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-ECS-MailScanner-ID: r1RDuBs6021454
X-ECS-MailScanner-From: tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Subject: Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-shishio-v6ops-dpvt
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: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 13:56:13 -0000

On 26 Feb 2013, at 14:07, "Brzozowski, John" <John_Brzozowski@Cable.Comcast.com> wrote:

> [jjmb] incorrect I have both, just stating that I have both.  Apologies if
> I was not clear.  I also have a good # of home routers actively using IPv6
> enabled broadband today, ~3%.

Congratulations, btw. That must be a large number when converted to real customers :)

The homenet architecture assumes a CPE rather than a single host. It discusses ISP allocations in section 3.4.1 of http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-homenet-arch-07.  As that text is in WGLC, any comments on that section would be welcome (preferably on the homenet list).

Tim

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email