Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-intarea-ipv6-required-01.txt (IPv6 Support Required for all IP-capable nodes) to Proposed Standard

2011-08-26 Thread Masataka Ohta
Before requiring IPv6 support, it is necessary to revise obviously broken parts of IPv6. For example, ICMPv6 generated agaist multicast packets should be forbidden or ICMPv6 implosions will occur. It will let ISPs filter ICMPv6, including but not limited to, those against multicast, which means

Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-intarea-ipv6-required-01.txt (IPv6 Support Required for all IP-capable nodes) to Proposed Standard

2011-08-23 Thread Peter Koch
IPv6 Support Required for all IP-capable nodes draft-ietf-intarea-ipv6-required-01 The document strives to convey the message that IP is no longer equivalent to IPv4, which is a goal that I'd fully support. However, while this is a political statement that the

Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-intarea-ipv6-required-01.txt (IPv6 Support Required for all IP-capable nodes) to Proposed Standard

2011-08-22 Thread George, Wesley
From: Keith Moore mo...@network-heretics.com To: ietf@ietf.org Subject: Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-intarea-ipv6-required-01.txt (IPv6 Support Required for all IP-capable nodes) to Proposed Standard I support publication of some document like this one. Suggestions for clarification

Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-intarea-ipv6-required-01.txt (IPv6 Support Required for all IP-capable nodes) to Proposed Standard

2011-08-22 Thread George, Wesley
From: SM s...@resistor.net To: ietf@ietf.org Reply-to: s...@resistor.net Subject: Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-intarea-ipv6-required-01.txt (IPv6 Support Required for all IP-capable nodes) to Proposed Standard X-RSN: 1/0/933/10475/58528 From Section 1: However, due to the success of the Internet

Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-intarea-ipv6-required-01.txt (IPv6 Support Required for all IP-capable nodes) to Proposed Standard

2011-08-22 Thread George, Wesley
From: SM s...@resistor.net To: Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com Reply-to: s...@resistor.net Subject: Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-intarea-ipv6-required-01.txt (IPv6 Support Required for all IP-capable nodes) to Proposed Standard Section 2 of RFC 4084 lists the primary IP service terms

Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-intarea-ipv6-required-01.txt (IPv6 Support Required for all IP-capable nodes) to Proposed Standard

2011-08-22 Thread SM
Hi George, At 10:11 22-08-2011, George, Wesley wrote: WEG] You're reading too much into this. It's a statement of the current situation, not a discussion about whether unique addresses are good or bad. Ok. WEG] As an operator (consumer ISP) who happens to spend a lot of time talking about

Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-intarea-ipv6-required-01.txt (IPv6 Support Required for all IP-capable nodes) to Proposed Standard

2011-08-21 Thread SM
Hi Brian, At 16:49 20-08-2011, Brian E Carpenter wrote: I think most of your comments will be dealt with by wordsmithing, but... See comments below. It't quite clear to me, but we could spell it out: s/IP/IPv4/. That's clearer. Yes it does. It clarifies, for consumer organizations for

Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-intarea-ipv6-required-01.txt (IPv6 Support Required for all IP-capable nodes) to Proposed Standard

2011-08-21 Thread Brian E Carpenter
On 2011-08-21 19:02, SM wrote: Hi Brian, ... IPv6 node requirements are defined in RFC 4294. It's merely an informative reference in draft-ietf-intarea-ipv6-required-01. The discussion about IPV4 address pool exhaustion (Section 1) is a distraction from a definition of an IP-capable node.

Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-intarea-ipv6-required-01.txt (IPv6 Support Required for all IP-capable nodes) to Proposed Standard

2011-08-20 Thread SM
At 11:33 19-08-2011, The IESG wrote: The IESG has received a request from the Internet Area Working Group WG (intarea) to consider the following document: - 'IPv6 Support Required for all IP-capable nodes' draft-ietf-intarea-ipv6-required-01.txt as a Proposed Standard The IESG plans to make a

Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-intarea-ipv6-required-01.txt (IPv6 Support Required for all IP-capable nodes) to Proposed Standard

2011-08-20 Thread Brian E Carpenter
Hi Subramanian, I think most of your comments will be dealt with by wordsmithing, but... On 2011-08-21 06:11, SM wrote: ... From Section 2: 'Updates [RFC1812], especially sections 1, 2, and 4 which use the generic IP synonymously with the more specific IPv4. Since RFC1812 is an

Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-intarea-ipv6-required-01.txt (IPv6 Support Required for all IP-capable nodes) to Proposed Standard

2011-08-19 Thread Keith Moore
I support publication of some document like this one. Suggestions for clarification to this document: 1. (section 2 in general) I think it's vague for this document to claim that it updates earlier documents as if it's changing the text of those documents. The reader is left with only a

Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-intarea-ipv6-required-01.txt (IPv6 Support Required for all IP-capable nodes) to Proposed Standard

2011-08-19 Thread Brian E Carpenter
I fully support this document. It could be tuned in the way Keith suggested, but basically it is a Good Thing. Regards Brian Carpenter ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Last Call: draft-ietf-intarea-ipv6-required-01.txt (IPv6 Support Required for all IP-capable nodes) to Proposed Standard

2011-08-19 Thread The IESG
The IESG has received a request from the Internet Area Working Group WG (intarea) to consider the following document: - 'IPv6 Support Required for all IP-capable nodes' draft-ietf-intarea-ipv6-required-01.txt as a Proposed Standard The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and