[v6ops] Re: New Version Notification for draft-link-v6ops-claton-03.txt

Nick Buraglio <buraglio@forwardingplane.net> Sat, 06 July 2024 22:00 UTC

Return-Path: <buraglio@forwardingplane.net>
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 9154AC14F749 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Jul 2024 15:00:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.106 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=forwardingplane.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id azx9ALzTRIyZ for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Jul 2024 14:59:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt1-x833.google.com (mail-qt1-x833.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::833]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6230C14F5F2 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sat, 6 Jul 2024 14:59:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt1-x833.google.com with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-44636bd6e22so21185321cf.2 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sat, 06 Jul 2024 14:59:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=forwardingplane.net; s=google; t=1720303197; x=1720907997; darn=ietf.org; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=6A+Ykjsa8kb6lJjelsDpC5RlMovYQyXYgauI/Nq4AuI=; b=riz/u1Z0tXqd2/yAUniMmqohSmtYL3Ow/G5ldiydUTE/J69aW0QIwNL6ak53lep9+U CE8M1hWwgHR/NZQdjoDIE6+ib91LxQflMoa9vz8X6Y6yqQnOHW+YMq2OvFcUdufLS42m 7DWQmCsRCFXv8Tbdup0w5Il6U+9RYLydBGY/E=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1720303197; x=1720907997; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=6A+Ykjsa8kb6lJjelsDpC5RlMovYQyXYgauI/Nq4AuI=; b=ed0qqY/aLpuxeFAQypL46R5+Q90FkHuws5kJIZQN7++Icpjbca4/Ze7H8Bq6OdF3Ny EMbZHD/BjcOP2T1MrZfGKmF4+2QuBSl3hmtpk3bJlVNRu8GNPwXUZpXrKGCmPFI0OPta RuYxuv69AptAff5TUtcRj0jVt4LME93PqR4NP3nPDwLgqZkS4rmkWxAfvSs+3oz2dkri Y3fC3QNOf/PQrPKkOj4RmxRk168ahaPHA5hYxCniwT5Z2kH15R1Sumvjvk3cTDxtN5ez qr4Y2Zjsbg/oZWqlwDUXpnYISc7CMt0ezAXT5AocOiPOQ2vweAsciSKFJ+766JTwnVIL fhUA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzER0JLQPYHnKw/snxBpZ8XgmHkltAuetcv9LRMswqOEVKYuCC9 hxGk1a3/NfZuWcPvsRcc8JrGrAmbz+myL7nJfJudYvBfkv0mNA+gp9bEuW3peu4u/cfD/hLYY2X tsWWP/VE70V59gj6/HPbE999BrsoaJ48JfV3eFyAIq6XbUKs=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFVTZdr7Z02CFnrKTZg73I+c78Vdg7iozpvIN+NPs1J5hG2UDVVppa3ElGrgtQxwXMslhEm7TlMXtaHO5KBPhg=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:2a14:b0:447:dd3b:7236 with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-447dd3b750dmr54355181cf.14.1720303197510; Sat, 06 Jul 2024 14:59:57 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <171656605305.48682.1088678194134276372@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAFU7BAQGyuEJ1iLSEyKQE__kmihV_TgEOmPyepdt08yEFTuh1Q@mail.gmail.com> <C5F7334E-7146-419D-9701-3C3E81EF3F1F@consulintel.es> <CAFU7BASYWz6Op3xo5kkcoJoLgFCFwgivefeMZ9hm5b3P8PZ-BA@mail.gmail.com> <8DB094F1-037B-40D0-9970-7B2A792CAA8C@consulintel.es> <CAFU7BATQV3-L79mQVMvEG9=Nf+x3a+7QUxVmu_Phfpscgi=AFg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAFU7BATQV3-L79mQVMvEG9=Nf+x3a+7QUxVmu_Phfpscgi=AFg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Nick Buraglio <buraglio@forwardingplane.net>
Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2024 16:59:46 -0500
Message-ID: <CACMsEX9jKmAyVcYAZj6bGOfwf-5CFewKX0EYwhssmdQJOhsOGg@mail.gmail.com>
To: V6 Ops List <v6ops@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000fe775d061c9b4ca0"
Message-ID-Hash: IK7MW4WWT7MUK5OX7UEI3PHKBRQRVURT
X-Message-ID-Hash: IK7MW4WWT7MUK5OX7UEI3PHKBRQRVURT
X-MailFrom: buraglio@forwardingplane.net
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-v6ops.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [v6ops] Re: New Version Notification for draft-link-v6ops-claton-03.txt
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/x9bp5lYU40Gf2BMKemzvRndD8fw>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:v6ops-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:v6ops-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:v6ops-leave@ietf.org>

A reminder that this adoption call is still open through tomorrow evening.
Anyone interested in this please read and reply.

nb


On Fri, Jul 5, 2024 at 4:25 AM Jen Linkova <furry13@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Jordi,
>
> On Mon, Jul 1, 2024 at 7:43 AM jordi.palet@consulintel.es
> <jordi.palet@consulintel.es> wrote:
> > >> Then, instead ensure that is well understood that the CLAT can be
> also in a CE:
> > >>   *  CLAT is performed by the host itself.
> > >> So:
> > >>   *  CLAT is performed by the host itself or a CE.
> > >> or
> > >>   *  CLAT is performed by the node (host or router).
> > >
> > > This paragraph is describing the “Wireless” mode (CLAT on a host)
> > > outside of 3GPP - in Wi-Fi hotspots, enterprise networks etc. So in
> > > this scenario it’s important that CLAT is performed by a host, not a
> > > CE router.
> >
> > The point is that there are UEs that are CE. For example, a well known
> case is T-Mobile that provided a CE with 464XLAT for broadband
> provisioning, as they don’t have GPON, etc.
>
> How about we say ' CLAT is performed by the UE'?
>
> > >> May be we need to consider defining a maximum delay instead of "The
> delay is implementation specific”.
> > >
> > > If we want to do this, I’d rather specify the default value and let
> > > implementations choose whether they want to use it or not. I guess the
> > > delay shall be comparable with an RTT between the client and the DHCP
> > > server(s) - but I do not know what value to choose here. Any
> > > suggestions?
> >
> > The reason why we needed HE was because the fallback delay from IPv6 to
> IPv4 was not predefined … I think we should avoid those type of situations.
> >The problem is that the RTT to DHCP servers can vary a lot in different
> contexts.
>
> Exactly. So, for example, why shall we prevent the node from
> remembering the median RTT for previous connections to the given
> network, and using it as a timeout value?
>
> If we are going to define that maximum delay, what do you think it should
> be?
>
> --
> Cheers, Jen Linkova
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list -- v6ops@ietf.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to v6ops-leave@ietf.org
>