headers
Livingood, Jason | 1 Oct 2010 20:28
Picon

Soliciting feedback on draft-livingood-dns-whitelisting-implications

Hi -

I am soliciting feeback on this new draft, available at
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-livingood-dns-whitelisting-implications. In particular, I am
looking for more text to add in the justifications / rationale for this practice in an attempt to
objectively examine the issue from many sides.  This is only a first draft of course.

Regards
Jason Livingood
_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@...
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
Permalink | Reply | 8 comments |
headers
Fred Baker | 1 Oct 2010 20:35
Picon
Favicon

Agenda scheduling for IETF 79

On Oct 1, 2010, at 9:19 AM, IETF Secretariat wrote:
> Dear Fred Baker,
> 
> The sessions that you have requested have been scheduled.
> Below is the scheduled session information followed by 
> the information of sessions that you have requested.
> 
> V6OPS Session 1 (2.5 hours)
> Wednesday, Morning Session I 0900-1130
> Room Name: Valley Ballroom B
> ----------------------------------------------
> V6OPS Session 2 (2.5 hours)
> Friday, Afternoon Session I 1300-1500
> Room Name: Valley Ballroom A
> ----------------------------------------------

On Oct 1, 2010, at 11:07 AM, IETF Agenda wrote:
> The DRAFT agenda is ready for viewing.  Please note the cutoff date for
> requests to reschedule Working Group and BOF meetings is October 11, 2010
> 17:00 PT.  The final agenda will be published on October 15, 2010.
> 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/79/agenda.html
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/79/agenda.txt
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/meeting/79/index.html
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Wanda
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 34 comments |
headers
Behcet Sarikaya | 1 Oct 2010 22:59
Picon
Favicon

Re: draft-sarikaya-v6ops-prefix-delegation-01

Hi Fred,

> 
> Dead?
>      draft-sarikaya-v6ops-prefix-delegation-01        
> 

We are waiting for Suresh's comments as he promised in Maastricht according to 
the official minutes.

Regards,

Behcet

      
_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@...
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Erik Kline | 2 Oct 2010 00:03
Picon
Favicon
Subject: Re: Soliciting feedback on draft-livingood-dns-whitelisting-implications

Re: Soliciting feedback on draft-livingood-dns-whitelisting-implications

On 1 October 2010 11:28, Livingood, Jason
<Jason_Livingood <at> cable.comcast.com> wrote:
> Hi -
>
> I am soliciting feeback on this new draft, available at
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-livingood-dns-whitelisting-implications. In particular, I am
looking for more text to add in the justifications / rationale for this practice in an attempt to
objectively examine the issue from many sides.  This is only a first draft of course.
>
> Regards
> Jason Livingood
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops <at> ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>

In general:

    * consider the similarities to DNS load balancing
    * consider the similarities in implication to DNS64
    * you should understand and document that no network-level access
control restrictions are implied

There seems to be some confusion wrt to this last point throughout the document.

A few other, technical issues listed below.

[Section 2]
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 5 comments |
headers
Joel Jaeggli | 2 Oct 2010 08:56

Re: Agenda scheduling for IETF 79

On 10/1/10 11:35 AM, Fred Baker wrote:
> On Oct 1, 2010, at 9:19 AM, IETF Secretariat wrote:
>> Dear Fred Baker,
>> 
>> The sessions that you have requested have been scheduled. Below is
>> the scheduled session information followed by the information of
>> sessions that you have requested.
>> 
>> V6OPS Session 1 (2.5 hours) Wednesday, Morning Session I 0900-1130 
>> Room Name: Valley Ballroom B 
>> ---------------------------------------------- V6OPS Session 2 (2.5
>> hours) Friday, Afternoon Session I 1300-1500 Room Name: Valley
>> Ballroom A ----------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> On Oct 1, 2010, at 11:07 AM, IETF Agenda wrote:
>> The DRAFT agenda is ready for viewing.  Please note the cutoff date
>> for requests to reschedule Working Group and BOF meetings is
>> October 11, 2010 17:00 PT.  The final agenda will be published on
>> October 15, 2010.
>> 
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/79/agenda.html 
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/79/agenda.txt
>> 
>> http://www.ietf.org/meeting/79/index.html
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks, Wanda
>> 
>> Only 36 days until the Beijing IETF! Online registration for the
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Tina TSOU | 3 Oct 2010 11:52
Favicon

Re: Agenda scheduling for IETF 79

Hi Fred,
Just a minor reminder that you said 0.75 to 1.5 sessions will be allocated to v4v6tran work.
Here is the record.



On Oct 2, 2010, at 2:35 AM, Fred Baker wrote:

On Oct 1, 2010, at 9:19 AM, IETF Secretariat wrote:
Dear Fred Baker,

The sessions that you have requested have been scheduled.
Below is the scheduled session informati on followed by
the information of sessions that you have requested.

V6OPS Se blockquote>
Wednesday, Morning Session I 0900-1130
Room Name: Valley Ballroom B
----------------------------------------------
V6OPS Session 2 (2.5 hours)
Friday, Afternoon Session I 1300-1500
Room Name: Valley Ballroom A
----------------------------------------------


On Oct 1, 2010, at 11:07 AM, IETF Agenda wrote:
The DRAFT agenda is ready for viewing.  Please note the cutoff date for
requests to reschedule Working Group and BOF meeting s is October 11, 2010
17:00 PT.  The final agenda will be published on October 15, 2010.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/79/agenda.html
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/79/agenda.txt

http://www.ietf.org/meeting/79/index.html


Thanks,
Wanda

Only 36 days until the Beijing IETF!
Online registration f or the IETF meeting is at:
http://www.ietf.org/meetings/79/


Joel, Kurtis, and I are sta F 79 Agenda. What I have at this instant is at http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/79/agenda/v6ops.html. I requested two morning (2.5 hours) slots; I got one morning slot and "Friday afternoon until we stop talking" - nominally two hours, but Wanda tells me she has noted that we will likely run over. It looks like we will have a pretty full agenda; between the -v4v6tran- and -v6ops- work, we have a total of 18 drafts.  

Anything I have missed - drop us a note at v6ops-chairs-nZLwadvX8BDR74oF6e/6QQ@public.gmane.org if you would. The chairs have not yet discussed this in detail amongst ourselves yet, so I'm not sure which day will get which topic, and there are other reorganizations that could happen. If folks have strong opinions, that too would be interesting to know.

This assumes, btw, that the WGLCs that we have been running mean that we don't need to discuss those draf ts. Besi nda, our status is:

To complete WGLC before IETF 79
draft-arkko-ipv6-transition-guidelines    (waiting new draft)
draft-ietf-v6ops-tunnel-security-concerns (waiting document writeup)
draft-ietf-v6ops-incremental-cgn          (just completed WGLC)
draft-ietf-v6ops-tunnel-loops             (in WGLC)
draft-ietf-v6ops-v6-in-mobile-networks   &nb sp;(October 11-24)
draft-ietf-v6ops-3177bis-48boundary       (Oct 24-Nov 7)

In IESG discu ssion: draft-gundavelli-v6ops-l2-unicast-04
draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-simple-security-14
draft-ietf-v6ops-ra-guard-08
draft-ietf-v6ops-rogue-ra-01 (Needs an updated draft from Tim)

RFC Editor Queue
draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-07
draft-ietf-v6ops-isp-scenarios-00
draft-thaler-v6ops-teredo-extensions-08

Dead?
draft-sarikaya-v6ops-prefix-delegation-01

Recent RFCs:

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5963.txt
5963 IPv6 Deployment in Internet Exchange Points (IXPs). R. Gagliano.
    August 2010. (Format: TXT=22786 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5991.txt
5991 Teredo Security Updates. D. Thaler, S. Krishnan, J. Hoagland.
    September 2010. (Format: TXT=20847 bytes) (Updates RFC4380) (Status:
    PROPOSED STANDARD)

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc6018.txt
6018 IPv4 and IPv6 Greynets. F. B aker, W. Harrop, G. Armitage.
    September 2010. (Format: TXT=21541 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

_______________________________________________
v6ops ma iling li ttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@...
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
Permalink | Reply | 31 comments |
headers
Fred Baker | 4 Oct 2010 07:37
Picon
Favicon

Re: Agenda scheduling for IETF 79


On Oct 3, 2010, at 5:52 AM, Tina TSOU wrote:

> Hi Fred,
> Just a minor reminder that you said 0.75 to 1.5 sessions will be allocated to v4v6tran work.
> Here is the record.
> https://cisco.webex.com/ciscosales/lsr.php?AT=pb&SP=MC&rID=46384302&rKey=10def3e927a116b3 

After you look at the posted agenda, please feel free to comment on it.

> B. R.
> Tina
> http://tinatsou.weebly.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Oct 2, 2010, at 2:35 AM, Fred Baker wrote:
> 
>> On Oct 1, 2010, at 9:19 AM, IETF Secretariat wrote:
>>> Dear Fred Baker,
>>> 
>>> The sessions that you have requested have been scheduled.
>>> Below is the scheduled session information followed by 
>>> the information of sessions that you have requested.
>>> 
>>> V6OPS Se blockquote>
>>>> Wednesday, Morning Session I 0900-1130
>>>> Room Name: Valley Ballroom B
>>>> ----------------------------------------------
>>>> V6OPS Session 2 (2.5 hours)
>>>> Friday, Afternoon Session I 1300-1500
>>>> Room Name: Valley Ballroom A
>>>> ----------------------------------------------
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Oct 1, 2010, at 11:07 AM, IETF Agenda wrote:
>>>> The DRAFT agenda is ready for viewing.  Please note the cutoff date for
>>>> requests to reschedule Working Group and BOF meetings is October 11, 2010
>>>> 17:00 PT.  The final agenda will be published on October 15, 2010.
>>>> 
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/79/agenda.html
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/79/agenda.txt
>>> 
>>> http://www.ietf.org/meeting/79/index.html
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Wanda
>>> 
>>> Only 36 days until the Beijing IETF!
>>> Online registration for the IETF meeting is at:
>>> http://www.ietf.org/meetings/79/
>> 
>> 
>> Joel, Kurtis, and I are sta F 79 Agenda. What I have at this instant is at
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/79/agenda/v6ops.html. I requested two morning (2.5 hours) slots;
I got one morning slot and "Friday afternoon until we stop talking" - nominally two hours, but Wanda tells
me she has noted that we will likely run over. It looks like we will have a pretty full agenda; between the
-v4v6tran- and -v6ops- work, we have a total of 18 drafts.  
>> 
>> Anything I have missed - drop us a note at v6ops-chairs@... if
you would. The chairs have not yet discussed this in detail amongst ourselves yet, so I'm not sure which day
will get which topic, and there are other reorganizations that could happen. If folks have strong
opinions, that too would be interesting to know.
>> 
>> This assumes, btw, that the WGLCs that we have been running mean that we don't need to discuss those draf
ts. Besi nda, our status is:
>> 
>> To complete WGLC before IETF 79
>> 	draft-arkko-ipv6-transition-guidelines    (waiting new draft)
>> 	draft-ietf-v6ops-tunnel-security-concerns (waiting document writeup)
>> 	draft-ietf-v6ops-incremental-cgn          (just completed WGLC)
>> 	draft-ietf-v6ops-tunnel-loops             (in WGLC)
>> 	draft-ietf-v6ops-v6-in-mobile-networks    (October 11-24)
>> 	draft-ietf-v6ops-3177bis-48boundary       (Oct 24-Nov 7)
>> 
>> In IESG discu ssion:	draft-gundavelli-v6ops-l2-unicast-04	
>> 	draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-simple-security-14	
>> 	draft-ietf-v6ops-ra-guard-08
>> 	draft-ietf-v6ops-rogue-ra-01 (Needs an updated draft from Tim)
>> 
>> RFC Editor Queue		
>> 	draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-07
>> 	draft-ietf-v6ops-isp-scenarios-00
>> 	draft-thaler-v6ops-teredo-extensions-08
>> 
>> Dead?
>> 	draft-sarikaya-v6ops-prefix-delegation-01		
>> 
>> Recent RFCs:
>> 
>> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5963.txt
>> 5963 IPv6 Deployment in Internet Exchange Points (IXPs). R. Gagliano.
>>     August 2010. (Format: TXT=22786 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)
>> 
>> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5991.txt
>> 5991 Teredo Security Updates. D. Thaler, S. Krishnan, J. Hoagland.
>>     September 2010. (Format: TXT=20847 bytes) (Updates RFC4380) (Status:
>>     PROPOSED STANDARD)
>> 
>> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc6018.txt
>> 6018 IPv4 and IPv6 Greynets. F. Baker, W. Harrop, G. Armitage.
>>     September 2010. (Format: TXT=21541 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> v6ops mailing list
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@...
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@...
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
Permalink | Reply | 30 comments |
headers
Tina TSOU | 4 Oct 2010 12:00
Favicon

Re: Agenda scheduling for IETF 79

Thank you for the arrangement. You made the agenda so quickly compared to the WG I chair;)

Some comments are below.

1)
"Welcome and introduction from the China Network Operators Group
Dong Yan, CNNOG and CNISP"

What's the implication from the China NOG introduction? In this case, do Asia, Europe and Oceania NOG also need to be given the introduction? These operators from North America, Europe, and Asia consider IETF is a global and original organ ization for IPv4 to IPv6 transition.

What's the relationship between IETF WG v6ops and xNOG in v4 to v6 transition area?

2)
17-Sep-10, <draft-lee-v4v6tran-problem-02.txt>Framework for IP Version Transition Scenarios
18-Aug-10, <draft-carpenter-v4v6tran-framework-00.txt>"

We have fully discussed the PS I-D and framework I-D in the v4v6tran WebEx meeting. 
The target is a set of use cases I-Ds and transition guides I-Ds for broadband, cable, and mobile scenarios, which are aimed f or information RFCs. 
Do the PS I-D and framework I-D need to be discussed again in WG v6ops? Are they also aimed for informational RFCs? I don't have strong opinion about thi s.
iv>
14-Sep-10, <draft-tian-v4v6tran-broadband-sp-usecase-00.txt>"
I don't know whether Can-Can would like to present this. I think it has been replaced by draft-huang-v6ops-v4v6tran-bb-usecase.

4)
15-Sep-10, <draft-yang-v4v6tran-ipv6-transition-guide-00.txt>IPv6 Transition Guide For A Large-scale Broadband Network
27-Sep-10, <draft-yang-v6ops-v4v6tran-bb-transition-guide-00.txt>"
I think only latter will be presented in WG v6ops Beijing meeting.
The latter is not China Telecom only any more. It is the initial version to invite contribution from all broa dband networks. 90% of China Telecom's existing access network is PPPoE access network, which may be similar to some of the operators. They will focus on this type. This I-D leave space fo ribute for existing DHCP access network. 

Hope it helps.



span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; ">



On Oct 4, 2010, at 1:37 PM, Fred Baker wrote:


On Oct 3, 2010, at 5:52 AM, Tina TSOU wrote:

Hi Fred,
Just a minor reminder that you said 0.75 to 1.5 sessions will be allocated to v4v6tran work.
Here is the record.
https://cisco.webex.com/ciscosales/lsr.php?AT=pb&SP=MC&rID=46384302&rKey=10def3e927a116b3

After you look at the posted agenda, please feel free to comment on it.

B. R.
Tina
http://tinatsou.weebly.com



te>
On Oct 2, 2010, at 2:35 AM, Fred Baker wrote:

On Oct 1, 2010, at 9:19 AM, IETF Secretariat wrote:
Dear Fred Baker,

The sessions that you have requested have been scheduled.
Below is the scheduled session information followed by
the information of sessions that you have requested.
quote> blockquote type="cite">

V6OPS Se blockquote>
Wednesday, Morning Session I 0900-1130
Room Name: Valley Ballroom B
----------------------------------------------
kquote>
V6OPS Session 2 (2.5 hours)
ockquote
Friday, Afternoon Session I 1300-1500
Room Name: Valley Ballroom A
----------------------------------------------


On Oct 1, 2010, at 11:07 AM, IETF Agenda wrote:
The DRAFT agenda is ready for viewing.  Please note the cutoff date for
requests to reschedule Working Group and BOF meetings is October 11, 2010
17:00 PT.  The final agenda will be published on October 15, 2010.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/79/agenda.html
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/79/agenda.txt

http://www.ietf.org/meeting/79/index.html


Thanks,
Wanda

Only 36 days until the Beijing IETF!
Online registration for the IETF meeting is at:
http://www.ietf.org/meetings/79/


Joel, Kurtis, and I are sta F 79 Agenda. What I have at this instant is at http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/79/agenda/v6ops.html. I requested t wo morni ot one morning slot and "Friday afternoon until we stop talking" - nominally two hours, but Wanda tells me she has noted that we will likely run over. It looks like we will have a pretty full agenda; between the -v4v6tran- and -v6ops- work, we have a total of 18 drafts.  

Anything I have missed - drop us a note at v6ops-chairs-nZLwadvX8BDR74oF6e/6QQ@public.gmane.org if you would. The chairs have not yet discussed this in detail amongst ourselves yet, so I'm not sure which day will get which topic, and there are other reorganizations that could happen. If folks have strong opinions, that too would be interesti ng to know.

This assumes, btw, that the WGL ing mean that we don't need to discuss those draf ts. Besi nda, our status is:

To complete WGLC before IETF 79
draft-arkko-ipv6-transition-guidelines    (waiting new draft)
draft-ietf-v6ops-tunnel-security-concerns (waiting document writeup)
draft-ietf-v6ops-incremental-cgn          (just completed WGLC)
draft-ietf-v6ops-tunnel-loops             (in WGLC)
draft-ietf-v6ops-v6-in-mobile-networks    (October 11-24)
draft-ietf-v6ops-3177bis-48boundary       (Oct 24-Nov 7)

In IESG discu ssion: draft-gundavelli-v6ops-l2-unicast-04
draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-simple-security-14
draft-ietf-v6ops-ra-guard-08
draft-ietf-v6ops-rogue-ra-01 (Needs an updated draft from Tim)

RFC Editor Queue
draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-07
lockquot e type="cite">
draft-ietf-v6ops-isp-scenarios-00
draft-thaler-v6ops-teredo-extensions-08

Dead?
draft-sarikaya-v6ops-prefix-delegation-01
te>

Recent RFCs:
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5963.txt
5963 IPv6 Deployment in Internet Exchange Points (IXPs). R. Gagliano.
   August 2010. (Format: TXT=22786 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5991.txt
5991 Teredo Secu rity Updates. D. Thaler, S. Krishnan, J. Hoagland.
   September 2010. (Format: TXT=20847 bytes) ( Updates ockquote>
   PROPOSED STANDARD)

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc6018.txt
6018 IPv4 and IPv6 Greynets. F. Baker, W. Harrop, G. Armitage.
   September 2010. (Format: TXT=21541 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops



_______________________________________________

v6ops mailing list
v6ops-EgrivxUAwEY@public.gmane.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops


_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@...
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
Permalink | Reply | 29 comments |
headers
Magnus Westerlund | 4 Oct 2010 14:47
Picon
Favicon

Re: draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-simple-security

Hi,

I just want to mention that I am satisfied with the resolution of my issue.

Cheers

Magnus

james woodyatt skrev 2010-09-30 03:50:
> everyone--
> 
> After conferring offline with the Julien Laganier, Arnaud Ebalard, Magnus Westerlund and Rémi
Després, I think the -14 revision that I just posted may turn out to be the final draft.  Please see
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-simple-security> for the differences going
from -12 to -13 and from -13 to -14.  Highlights:
> 
>  - Improved normative and informative text for Mobility Support.
> 
>  - Clarified normative text for Encapsulated Security Payload to
>    cover path MTU discovery.
> 
>  - Improved normative text for generic upper-layer transports.
> 
>  - Explicitly note that the DEFAULT configuration of "transparent"
>    mode is optional.
> 
>  - Mention RFC 5386 in security considerations.
> 
>  - Minor editorial nits.
> 
> If there are still technical and editorial issues with the draft, then I don't know what they might be at
this point.
> 
> 
> --
> james woodyatt <jhw@...>
> member of technical staff, communications engineering
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@...
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
> 

--

-- 

Magnus Westerlund

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                | Phone  +46 10 7148287
Färögatan 6                | Mobile +46 73 0949079
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: magnus.westerlund@...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@...
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Fred Baker | 4 Oct 2010 15:00
Picon
Favicon

Re: Agenda scheduling for IETF 79


On Oct 4, 2010, at 6:00 AM, Tina TSOU wrote:

> Thank you for the arrangement. You made the agenda so quickly compared to the WG I chair;)
> 
> Some comments are below.
> 
> 1)
> "Welcome and introduction from the China Network Operators Group
> Dong Yan, CNNOG and CNISP"
> 
> What's the implication from the China NOG introduction? In this case, do Asia, Europe and Oceania NOG also
need to be given the introduction? These operators from North America, Europe, and Asia consider IETF is a
global and original organization for IPv4 to IPv6 transition.

It's not unusual to have a local group present a greeting, although it is more commonly done in the plenary. I
sought this out as some on v4tov6transition seemed unaware of the local operational organizations.

> What's the relationship between IETF WG v6ops and xNOG in v4 to v6 transition area?

v6ops is a point of interface between the operational community and the IETF community; the operators can
touch base with us anywhere they like, of course, but here they can explicitly get IETF involvement in
their issues. The various RIR and *NOG communities, as in IPv4 networking, are strictly operational and
deal with matters of operational policy and practice.

> 2)
> "Problem Statements of IPv6 Transition of ISP
>      17-Sep-10, <draft-lee-v4v6tran-problem-02.txt>
> Framework for IP Version Transition Scenarios
>      18-Aug-10, <draft-carpenter-v4v6tran-framework-00.txt>"
> 
> We have fully discussed the PS I-D and framework I-D in the v4v6tran WebEx meeting. 
> The target is a set of use cases I-Ds and transition guides I-Ds for broadband, cable, and mobile
scenarios, which are aimed for information RFCs. 
> Do the PS I-D and framework I-D need to be discussed again in WG v6ops? Are they also aimed for informational
RFCs? I don't have strong opinion about this.

The authors haven't told me what their plans for the documents are. You asked for time to discuss them; I
assume the authors would like to discuss them. I'll let the authors tell me if what further plans they have.
But since, per Ron, this work is coming into v6ops, it seems like the v4v6tran group might want to talk with v6ops.

> iv>
> "Use Case For IPv6 Transition For a Large-Scale Broadband Service Provider
>      14-Sep-10, <draft-tian-v4v6tran-broadband-sp-usecase-00.txt>"
> I don't know whether Can-Can would like to present this. I think it has been replaced by draft-huang-v6ops-v4v6tran-bb-usecase.

Thanks for the heads-up; can-can had not communicated that to me. 

> 4)
> "IPv6 Transition Guide Broadband Access
>      15-Sep-10, <draft-yang-v4v6tran-ipv6-transition-guide-00.txt>
> IPv6 Transition Guide For A Large-scale Broadband Network
>      27-Sep-10, <draft-yang-v6ops-v4v6tran-bb-transition-guide-00.txt>"
> I think only latter will be presented in WG v6ops Beijing meeting.
> The latter is not China Telecom only any more. It is the initial version to invite contribution from all
broadband networks. 90% of China Telecom's existing access network is PPPoE access network, which may be
similar to some of the operators. They will focus on this type. This I-D leave space fo ribute for existing
DHCP access network. 

Tell you what. I'll drop a note to each author I 

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@...
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
Permalink | Reply | 16 comments |

Gmane