Subject: [16NG] Document Action: 'Analysis of IPv6 Link Models for 802.16 based Networks' to Informational RFC

From: The IESG <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 11:30:34 -0400

The IESG has approved the following document:

- 'Analysis of IPv6 Link Models for 802.16 based Networks '
   <draft-ietf-16ng-ipv6-link-model-analysis-03.txt> as an Informational RFC

This document is the product of the IP over IEEE 802.16 Networks Working 
Group. 

The IESG contact persons are Jari Arkko and Mark Townsley.

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-16ng-ipv6-link-model-analysis-03.txt

Technical Summary
 
  This document provides different IPv6 link models that are suitable
  for 802.16 based networks and provides analysis of various
  considerations for each link model and the applicability of each link
  model under different deployment scenarios.
 
Working Group Summary
  
  This document is result of a Design Team that was formed 
  to analyze the IPv6 link models for 802.16 based networks.
  Based on the recommendations of the design team and this
  document, the working group has chosen the unique-prefix-per-
  link/mn model over the previously assumed shared prefix
  model. The new model is in use in the IPv6 over 802.16 IPCS
  document (draft-ietf-16ng-ipv6-over-ipv6cs), and has also
  been adopted by the Wimax Forum.
 
Protocol Quality
 
  Jari Arkko has revied this document for the IESG.

Note to RFC Editor
 
  Please insert "IEEE" in front of references to 802.16
  or other IEEE specification numbers throughout the
  document, including the title.

  Please expand "MS" to "MS (Mobile Station)" on first
  occurence in Section 1. Similarly, expand "BS" to 
  "BS (Base Station)". And later in the document,
  "CS" to "CS (Convergence Sublayer)".

  Please expand "MLD" to "MLD (Multicast Listener
  Discovery)" in Section 3.1.3.

  Please add the following informative reference:

   [WiMAXArch]
              "WiMAX End-to-End Network Systems Architecture
              http://www.wimaxforum.org/technology/documents",
              August 2006.

  and refer to that from Section 1, 2nd paragraph, 1st sentence.

  In Section 3.1, change "on per MS basis" to "on a per MS basis".

  Also in Section 3.1, paragraph 1: change "does not any multicast"
  to "does not provide any multicast". And change "illustrates high"
  to "illustrate a". Finally, change "one more" to "one or more".

  Change the section titles (3 instances) that say "Reuse of
  Existing Standards" to "Reuse of Existing Specifications".

  Replace the text in the Security Considerations section
  with the following:

    This document provides the analysis of various IPv6 link models for
    IEEE 802.16 based networks and this document as such does not 
    introduce any new security threats. No matter what the link model 
    is, the networks employ the same link-layer security mechanisms
    defined in [5]. However, the chosen link model affects the scope
    of link local communication, and this may have security implications
    for protocols that are designed to work within the link scope. This 
    is the concern for shared link model compared other models wherein
    private resources e.g. personal printer cannot be put onto a public
    WiMAX network. This may restrict the usage of shared prefix model
    to enterprise environments.

    The Neighbor Discovery related security issues are document in [RFC 
  
    2461] [RFC 2462] and these are applicable for all the models
    described in this documents. The model specific security 
    considerations are documented in their respective protocol
    specifications.

  Place a new top-level section between Sections 5 and 6:

    X. Effect on Routing

    The model used for in a 802.16 network may have a significant
    impact on how routing protocols are run over such a network. 
    The deployment model presented in this document discusses the 
    least impacting model on routing as connectivity on the provider
    edge is intentionally limited to point to point connectivity 
    from one BS to any one of multiple MSs. Any other deployment
    model may cause a significant impact on routing protocols, 
    however, but they are outside the scope of this document.

_______________________________________________
16NG mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/16ng