IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-ietf-v6ops-6204bis

"Hemant Singh (shemant)" <shemant@cisco.com> Wed, 12 October 2011 15:15 UTC

Return-Path: <shemant@cisco.com>
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 8B10621F8CA5 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 08:15:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.259
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.259 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.340, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D4R079vHB6QK for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 08:15:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF7BB21F8CA9 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 08:15:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=shemant@cisco.com; l=2377; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1318432519; x=1319642119; h=mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date: message-id:in-reply-to:references:from:to:cc; bh=I/THjE88mEARYyrVfTZw2wzfYhUK8YP+MUu4Ub/BYjM=; b=Q/hJ7x+4mwxRncbfguBb5QeEBJzILB+6m5LQq3nQ4qUC9pddhxSQ1yju +1qtiZ2h/ZmbZUA+pxGg5mdppHsT9vMtepfwrIXUI5hO1ze9doRZxjl71 UafemopKUj9/vD3gg+vSd5+uHvtxmKP8NMi7iQIiwvjRF5G9/oKYm5MTm 8=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AnQAAPmtlU6tJV2a/2dsb2JhbABDmRSNbIEzgQWBUwEBAQQSAR0KPwwEAgEIEQQBAQsGFwEGAUUJCAEBBAESCBqjRwGeZ4Z3YQSHf5EnjEE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.69,335,1315180800"; d="scan'208";a="27864262"
Received: from rcdn-core-3.cisco.com ([173.37.93.154]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 12 Oct 2011 15:15:18 +0000
Received: from xbh-rcd-302.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-302.cisco.com [72.163.63.9]) by rcdn-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p9CFFIUx016400; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:15:18 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-109.cisco.com ([72.163.62.151]) by xbh-rcd-302.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:15:17 -0500
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:15:16 -0500
Message-ID: <5B6B2B64C9FE2A489045EEEADDAFF2C3030A39C1@XMB-RCD-109.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <282BBE8A501E1F4DA9C775F964BB21FE3EB758B7AE@GRFMBX704BA020.griffon.local>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [v6ops] new draft: draft-ietf-v6ops-6204bis
Thread-Index: AcyIIqgLtG0cLqI5S/6UvGcFzVWxAQAAv1twACPW4IAACmn1YAAB9wnQAAJzMTA=
References: <201110111355.p9BDt1M23806@ftpeng-update.cisco.com><282BBE8A501E1F4DA9C775F964BB21FE3EB758B7A8@GRFMBX704BA020.griffon.local><1B8E4C5A-D08B-4F37-B701-A39745136A33@cisco.com><750BF7861EBBE048B3E648B4BB6E8F4F1FDCA4C3@crexc50p><282BBE8A501E1F4DA9C775F964BB21FE3EB758B7AB@GRFMBX704BA020.griffon.local><750BF7861EBBE048B3E648B4BB6E8F4F1FDCAC83@crexc50p> <282BBE8A501E1F4DA9C775F964BB21FE3EB758B7AE@GRFMBX704BA020.griffon.local>
From: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" <shemant@cisco.com>
To: Maglione Roberta <roberta.maglione@telecomitalia.it>, "STARK, BARBARA H" <bs7652@att.com>, "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Oct 2011 15:15:17.0767 (UTC) FILETIME=[C00FF970:01CC88F1]
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org, Dave Thaler <dthaler@microsoft.com>, Ullio Mario <mario.ullio@telecomitalia.it>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-ietf-v6ops-6204bis
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:15:19 -0000

Roberta,

Note when you first asked for PCP in the CE rtr document two IETF's
back, we could not add the PCP because it was still not far from being
an RFC.  The CE rtr document is a Requirements document that does not
generally add an I-D reference.   Then during the last IETF you again
asked for PCP and during and after the IETF I contacted all relevant
people (authors of DS-Lite RFC) and vendors of commercial host operating
systems such as Microsoft and Apple.

Note, the WAN of the CE rtr has no use for a PCP client unless a host in
the LAN of the CE rtr initiates a PCP client request.  So I pinged host
vendors at Microsoft and Apple and one reply I got was no commercial
host OS currently supports a PCP client.  I suspect even host vendors
are waiting for PCP to become an RFC.  The PCP I-D did not pass two
LastCalls and I heard last from the Alain Durand that a 3rd LastCall
will be initiated.   This is a clear reason, why the CE rtr does not
include I-Ds and waits till an RFC.  

Further, when you say PCP, do you mean PCP Proxy or PCP server in the CE
rtr LAN?  PCP Proxy is not an RFC either.  The PCP client in the WAN of
the CE rtr is waiting for the PCP base document.  Thus, I would first
get both of PCP base and PCP Proxy to be RFCs.

Please let me know if we can do anything else that I may have missed.

Regards,

Hemant

-----Original Message-----
From: v6ops-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Maglione Roberta
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 9:57 AM
To: 'STARK, BARBARA H'; Fred Baker (fred)
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org; Ullio Mario
Subject: Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-ietf-v6ops-6204bis

Hi Barbara,
   the main issue we see today  for the DS-Lite deployment is exactly
the DS-Lite support on the CPE.
We only have some prototypes CPE's with DS-Lite at the moment and that's
why we are struggling to start with a deployment now.
You say you would prefer adding in the document "now" technologies and I
understand that, but to me this sounds like a chicken and egg problem
because CPE's vendors are reluctant to implement features if they don't
have a RFC number.
So coming back to your question about the timeframe for DS-Lite
deployment, I would say next year, but in my opinion if we want a
deployment for next year we need an RFC now.
Thanks,
Best regards,
Roberta

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email