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

Le 19/02/2015 11:19, Lorenzo Colitti a écrit :
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 6:14 PM, Heatley, Nick <nick.heatley@ee.co.uk
> <mailto:nick.heatley@ee.co.uk>> wrote:
>
> If another body could be accountable for the document, that it
> represents the views of a suitable collective (mobile operators), but
> the technical content was filtered via IETF, that would be ideal,
> no?
>
> I have no idea how to engineer such an outcome, but if it could be
> done then this work should not be wasted – could be a “GSMA sponsored
> RFC”?
>
>
> You could make it an independent submission, and say that it
> represents the recommendations of the authors (see RFC 4846 for a
> description of the process, or RFC 6732 for an example of such an
> independent submission RFC).
>
> If what you're after is IETF expertise, then I think the document has
> had plenty of exposure to that already, given it's been in the WG for
> over a year and a half.

As an alternative for more than independent submission, one could (1)
squeeze it into few requirements having more tract than the set, (2) get
software writers to expose running code, (3) get complimentary profiles
other than cellular operators interested, and call it a deal.

For example, squeeze it to recommend only DHCP-PD, tell how OSS
implementations exist, and get an equipment manufacturer on board.

For the 464xlat/nat64/dns64/CLAT recommendation part - I personally
think it is way too strict in its reaches, although I fully agree with a
long-term goal of IPv6-only.  It is strict, because many other IETF RFCs
offer much more solutions to this kind of problem; other new solutions
can be developped as well (Problem Statement first?).  It has wide
reaches because it recommends 'should' a _set_ RFCs.

Finally, if all we have is facing a widely used deployment, with no
means to influence operator's network to end-user needs, tired of
discussions, then this should be an INFORMATIONAL and that's that.
There is much value in it as well.

Alex

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