RE: Node requirements: draft-ietf-6man-node-req-bis-03.txt

["Julien Abeille (jabeille)" <jabeille at cisco.com>]

Hi all,

it would be nice to have a stronger position wether it is a guidance or
requirement doc. The point is the authority to which manufacturers refer
to prove that their nodes are IPv6 capable is not RFC4294 but the IPv6
ready logo program. the IPv6 ready certification also does not follow
100% RFC 4294: first, profiles are defined (phase 1, 2, 3), then in each
of them some points differ from RFC4294: e.g. in phase 2 PMTU discovery
is mandated, (not a SHOULD), in phase 1 and 2 IPSec is not mandated.

Does it make sense to define profiles (which others do anyway, like
DoD), and if not is it feasible to find a common denominator (to all
device and all LL) that makes sense and is not too limited. If some LL
cannot afford ND, does mandating ND make sense?

Best,
Julien

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ipv6-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-bounces at ietf.org] On 
> Behalf Of Brian E Carpenter
> Sent: mardi 21 juillet 2009 03:29
> To: Thomas Narten
> Cc: ipv6 at ietf.org
> Subject: Re: Node requirements: draft-ietf-6man-node-req-bis-03.txt
> 
> 
> >  - proper status of this document (info vs. BCP) and whether this
> >    document can update any existing RFC
> 
> There's a standards-track beast defined in section 3.2 of 
> RFC2026 as an "Applicability Statement":
> 
> "  An Applicability Statement specifies how, and under what
>    circumstances, one or more TSs [technical specifications] 
> may be applied to support a particular
>    Internet capability.
>    ...
>    An AS also specifies the circumstances in which the use
>    of a particular TS is required, recommended, or elective..."
> 
> I think we can choose, if we want, to make the present 
> document an "Applicability Statement" Proposed Standard or 
> BCP that describes the functionality of a full-spec IPv6 
> node, and therefore elevates MAY to SHOULD or MUST if we want to.
> 
> Personally, I think that's a good idea, rather than issuing 
> an informational document that leaves wiggle room on basics 
> such as ND.
> 
>     Brian
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6 at ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>