IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment and draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment

Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 30 March 2021 10:39 UTC

Return-Path: <dhruv.ietf@gmail.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 59AAC3A02BE; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 03:39:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 j24RLolEU_7Z; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 03:39:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io1-xd35.google.com (mail-io1-xd35.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DEDD13A017E; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 03:39:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io1-xd35.google.com with SMTP id j26so15865226iog.13; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 03:39:49 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ykIgCEz6E/L/uCLAjTPr42l9x5eFPyCp8Le7eMEAN30=; b=OL1i5fjzho1pNj2X0zY4nZo2QhM49n6eRy8gkMFxzv6NlKoAAr1T5UqiOfFTAKacLk ULRS6NUHFCZY9DMGPwORPESfgg9J4fcqwiMqFjiJ8WEEQ6cFcErMLThvDiqlR0dmhrs5 A7L4iwdrT+7N1qjulKY2YD8RPyg1L3WIntO71YoWIMCfYO87XzJSRY0lVQXn4ZpYAL4c m5y2haQdZUx9MhSEsgLZnbNnhV806sfyQpJ3mdnxdJvFmjMe6JnFT4iF7OdpwXYc6h48 yX41SDeelisJFz9EwTMpFnthqXuGEVRAvvK7tZAXb2bBNvPpcySYSJeOCN+KpJi/NoQs pLOA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ykIgCEz6E/L/uCLAjTPr42l9x5eFPyCp8Le7eMEAN30=; b=DVME+stcnieFhHGW3mKI5tSYtalN0E3jPBil0nH16XMKYO1aWSzEaD6NBJCysLlZZh sWLo9khL8NUlPlqHRF4SNeNSMYPW7bwrq+TBtBXVQPnjU16S26Kskfho/RzTW1DRPiv+ Vbyq9QOC3unAceHc1Q6oiwIt+L2CL9atIgDkD/m0wtlq44856qY9cqkePCJ1LKQSmBeJ Jv+UPIWOekJQjRyVev1ExXSOYHWs5DDDBoisgQMvc9wdmTO6YInjocpV0lR7vhKJSJJS kbFosCTQvPTmQ8hx+1FNjX6FNZnc8kvHe7UbUvgJEqEYCWjuU0ivk6cLDrOEaLhPYL7m WSBQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531CJOvp09wBi7G/X8wxjXlhPNCdcszKPQD+w4tqnUodST6YFJIM nCz5A/Hnw3XOht1I07KhiSbkHXqicSIUbQ8EpAg=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzSWg1LXnocFraaDp2JhWC6kWhSLN9/JRgIdNKiuDbrNejMM48wLgG4qf8Y+XDkmu0kvpFcos73SBkD+X266nc=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6638:3399:: with SMTP id h25mr28591599jav.15.1617100787321; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 03:39:47 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <BL0PR05MB5316425C5650B5D2FE43DE4DAE6C9@BL0PR05MB5316.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <59B5C1F7-48E4-4915-BAAC-41D8ADA29E8F@gmail.com> <18ea74665936408bb33f20630da95311@huawei.com> <E0757B36-8FFB-43A8-8F8B-A7F152F81156@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <E0757B36-8FFB-43A8-8F8B-A7F152F81156@gmail.com>
From: Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 16:09:10 +0530
Message-ID: <CAB75xn5gan-=uzBi2NwXwQcS+gDUh0Zp--1095C3VhVDbdaGrg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>, draft-lmhp-v6ops-transition-comparison@ietf.org, "draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment@ietf.org" <draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/qlo1PzvIDfns_t6usKSzqLb4kpw>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment and draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 10:39:54 -0000

Hi Fred,

I reviewed draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment [1]. I found it to be quite
useful and would like to see it adopted. The survey text showcased key
trends that are useful even if they would not reflect the latest
deployment numbers, post-publication.

There is still work to do, which is fine as we are talking about
adoption. Based on the long discussion on the list, there is
definitely interest in this work.

I also did a quick read of draft-lmhp-v6ops-transition-comparison, I
found the comparison to be quite useful and I would like to see both
drafts adopted and worked on by the WG.

Thanks!
Dhruv

[1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/Nawiok0A_Enby7IzrjUCO69Mn2o/
On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 10:28 AM Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 19, 2021, at 1:39 AM, Paolo Volpato <paolo.volpato@huawei.com> wrote:
> >
> > For lmhp-v6ops-transition-comparison, on behalf of the authors of draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment I can say we are in favor of the WG adoption. Not only is it a good description of the transition technologies to IPv6, but it also constitutes a basis for our draft.
>
> OK, let me put this to the working group. We asked about adoption of draft-lmhp-v6ops-transition-comparison once before (in January 2020), and got essentially no response. It has come up on the list twice since, in July and in November. The authors of draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment would like to see it adopted. The two sets of authors are disjoint. I therefore have at least nine people that would like to see us adopt and publish it. What other folks have opinions, pro or con?
>
> Along the same lines, are there opinions regarding the adoption of draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment?
>
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?qdr=a&q=%22draft-lmhp-v6ops-transition-comparison%22
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?qdr=a&q=%22draft-vf-v6ops-ipv6-deployment%22
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email