Re: [16NG] Request for review of draft-ietf-16ng-ip-over-ethernet-over-802-dot-16 from a DSL perspective

[Frank Xia <xiayangsong at huawei.com>]

Hi Folks

General comments include:
1)removing public access recommendation part.
 We can have an informational draft on
 "IPoEo802.16 access in Broadband Network".
2)re-considering distributed bridging funcionalities.
 It is hard to implement when a centralized database needed.

Please check the detailed comments:
1) Section 8
 "Therefore, the AR in the  public access link model
  SHOULD assign common IPv6 prefixes to all SSs
  served by the AR"
 IP addresing is still under discussion in Broadband Forum.
 However, IMO, these is almost a consensus that each
 SS uses a unique IPv6 prefixe.

2)Section 7.3.
When a network-side bridge receives an ARP request
 from a host behind subsriber-side bridge, the network
 side bridge should discard the request if the destination
 host is also behind the same subscriber-side switch.

3)Appendix B.
 I propose that the edge network-side switchs
 are responsible for host database maitenance, and
 responsing ARP request as a proxy.
 No centralized database is needed.

4)Section 7.2
  It is better to remove TR101 stuff from this section.

BR
Frank


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <g_e_montenegro at yahoo.com>
To: "Mark Townsley" <townsley at cisco.com>; "Frank Xia" 
<xiayangsong at huawei.com>
Cc: "Jari Arkko" <jari.arkko at piuha.net>; "Soohong Daniel Park" 
<soohongp at gmail.com>; 
<draft-ietf-16ng-ip-over-ethernet-over-802-dot-16 at tools.ietf.org>; 
<16ng at ietf.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 6:01 PM
Subject: Request for review of 
draft-ietf-16ng-ip-over-ethernet-over-802-dot-16 from a DSL perspective


> Hi Mark and Frank,
>
> Your names have been offered as people who are familiar with DSL network 
> deployments.
>
> We would like to request your review of a 16ng draft that may have some 
> similarities with those deployments:
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-16ng-ip-over-ethernet-over-802-dot-16-07
>
> This draft is in AD review, and Jari asked the WG to close the loop on 
> this draft with DSL-savvy folks. The idea is not that they should match, 
> but that DSL deployments have some similarities, hence you might have good 
> insight and feedback on this draft.
>
> Please feel free to forward to other DSL experts you may be aware of. If 
> at all possible, we would like to get some feedback by December 12, 2008.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Gabriel and Daniel, 16ng co-chairs


_______________________________________________
16NG mailing list
16NG at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/16ng