Hi Thomas/Hermant I will put together 2-3 pages as Thomas suggest on the main "crooks of the issue" at hand in BBF. I was intending on coming to IETF and presenting the issue in detail at the SAVI working Group this week but due to other work commitments it was not possible. However my colleague Suresh Krishnan is attending and you can discuss the issue with him if this needs to be addressed more urgently.
Alan -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Hemant Singh (shemant) Sent: November 7, 2009 4:40 AM To: Thomas Narten; Stark, Barbara Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; james woodyatt; [email protected]; IPv6 Operations; IETF IPv6 Mailing List Subject: RE: [savi] Broadband Forum liaison to IETF on IPv6 security I agree with Thomas. The reason I and Wes could reply with some ideas is because we are familiar with the cable deployment and contributed text for ND Proxy behavior in cable standards. A start for diagram may be RFC4779 that DSL folks should look at and tell us what they talking about. If a DSL deployment doesn't exist in RFC4779, then for long-term one should bis RFC4779 to include the new DSL deployment so that all can reference a common doc and discuss deployment problems for IPv6. Hemant -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Thomas Narten Sent: Friday, November 06, 2009 2:18 PM To: Stark, Barbara Cc: [email protected]; SAVI Mailing List; [email protected]; james woodyatt; [email protected]; IPv6 Operations; IETF IPv6 Mailing List Subject: Re: [savi] Broadband Forum liaison to IETF on IPv6 security > The liaison was posted in March 2009. It can be found here: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/documents/LIAISON/file621.doc This is too skimpy of problem statement for me to understand the details of the problem. I don't know that a lot is needed. Maybe 2-3 pages is enough. But show me a diagram, label the pieces, show me the properties of the pieces and explain what the *exact* problem is. Who needs to do DAD? Why doesn't it work? etc. And note that comments like (quoting from the above statement): "We can envision a number of scenarios, both malice or vendor incompetence by which this can happen." There is very little anyone can do to prevent "vendor incompetence". I hope you aren't asking the IETF to solve this problem! :-) Thomas _______________________________________________ savi mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/savi -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
