[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
AW: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt
sounds good to me.
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: email@example.com
> [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] Im Auftrag von Ole Troan
> Gesendet: Freitag, 8. Januar 2010 12:14
> An: Mark Smith
> Cc: Fred Baker; IPv6 Operations
> Betreff: Re: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-03.txt
> apologies for the delay. catching up after Christmas.
> > "Section 4.1 WAN side configuration
> > WLL-1: The IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over Ethernet
> > I don't see how that can be a MUST when the WAN interface may not
> > support Ethernet framing e.g. a 3G/HSPDA or Wimax IPv6 CS
> WAN interface.
> > Similarly for the PPPoE requirement (and arguably for the PPP
> > requirement) -
> > "WLL-2: The IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over PPP [RFC5072] and
> > PPPoE [RFC2516]. In a dual-stack environment
> with IPCP and
> > IPV6CP running over one PPP logical channel, the
> NCPs MUST be
> > treated as independent of each other and start
> and terminate
> > independently."
> > I think it would be better to try to avoid making anything
> relating to
> > IPv6-over-foo support MUSTs, keeping the scope to IPv6 CPE
> > requirements. If IPv6-over-foo functions are in scope for the draft,
> > then I'd suggest making treating them as separate sections, saying
> > something like, "If the WAN interface supports Ethernet
> > then it MUST support IPv6 over Ethernet [RFC2464] and PPP [RFC5072]
> > and PPPoE [RFC2516].", "If the WAN interface supports ATM
> > then it MUST support PPPoA [RFCXXXX]" etc.
> > A future CPE's lack of compliance with this draft just because it
> > doesn't support Ethernet framing on it's WAN interface
> would be a shame.
> would you be happier with the following text?
> WLL-1: If the WAN interface supports Ethernet encapsulation, then
> the IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over Ethernet
> WLL-2: If the WAN interface supports PPP encapsulation:
> (a) The IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over PPP
> and PPPoE [RFC2516].
> (b) In a dual-stack environment with IPCP and
> IPV6CP running
> over one PPP logical channel, the NCPs MUST be treated
> as independent of each other and start and terminate
> Best regards,