Re: review for draft-kaippallimalil-v6ops-ipv6-bbnet-00

[Frank Xia <xiayangsong@huawei.com>]

hello Hemant

Please check my reply...

BR
Frank

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" <shemant@cisco.com>
To: "Frank Xia" <xiayangsong@huawei.com>; <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 12:46 AM
Subject: RE: review for draft-kaippallimalil-v6ops-ipv6-bbnet-00


> The draft that cable wrote is draft-mule-cablelabs-docsis3-ipv6-00.txt.
> Frank=>Cable network has many different characteristis from
> DSL network, and IMHO, it can't be applied to DSL network directly.

I only gave the reference to cable draft to show which one it was.  I
wasn't saying to use it for DSL.  

> 1. Is the draft for Standards Track, Informational, or a BCP?
> Frank=>It is intended to be informational. 

So please fix the draft to say it's Informational.
Frank=>sure.

In general, if DSL needs IETF help, be prepared to have your DSL
standards take a long time.  IETF deals with more generalized devices
and their process can more lengthy than a focused cable standards or DSL
standards body.  I would rather DSL gets experts from routing and
general data networking product companies and also get folks who know
IPv6 cold to work in the DSL Forum directly.  Cable added IPv6 to its
docsis 3.0 standards because we had router and IPv6 folks from Cisco and
Juniper involved in the standards, also cable savvy folks from Cisco,
and DHCPv6 experts like Ralph Droms and Bernie Volz.  That is how
specific deployment standards get done.
Frank=>IETF 16NG working group had been working on 
rfc5121"Transmission of IPv6 via the IPv6 Convergence Sublayer
over IEEE 802.16 Networks" .   This document is the basic IPv6
document for WiMAX.   Of course, some WiMAX experts were
involved in the activity.  As for our draft,  we also presented the 
draft in DSL Forum, and will discuss in the coming DSL meeting.

Anyhow, your document is not even ready to be picked up by any IETF WG
right now.  

Hemant