Subject: RE: [Softwires] WG LC Problem Statement (Alain Baudot comments)

From: "BAUDOT Alain RD-CORE-CAE" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2005 23:14:01 +0100

Some more comments on Spencer's feedback in line.

Thanks,
Alain.

Section 3.5. Sofwire initiator

The last sentence (nomadic case) is a bit confusing regarding different 
address families it refers to: should it be clarified through an example
?

Spencer: I agree that the wording is confusing. I suspect that it would 
improve things if we had agreed-upon terms for 
"tunnel-endpoint-address-family" and "tunneled-address-family" - the
current 
text is "one address family"/"the other address family", treating the 
address families as if they were interchangeable (instead of one address

family being used to tunnel the other). Are my suggested terms helpful?

AB> I agree. Your suggested terms should help clarifying the wording.

Section 3.12. Operations and Managment

Usage accounting is quite generic. It should refer also to logging (does
it 
include logging ?) and to the possibility to explicitly make a link
between 
a user and the part of various AF it is allocated.

Spencer: I would like to hear other opinions about including logging - I

agree, but I'm just the editor. If I understand your comment, you are
asking 
for something like, "logging, including the ability to correlate tunnel 
endpoint source and destination addresses with tunneled source and 
destination addresses" - did I get this right?

AB> Yes, you got it right. This is something we definitely had to fix
before launching the IPv6 trial Wanadoo is currently running in France.
I suspect other ISP would face the same concerns, and I agree other
opinions would be welcome.

_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires