Subject: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-3gpp-eps WGLC

From: Fred Baker <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 06:04:14 -0700

This is to initiate a two week working group last call of draft-ietf-v6ops-3gpp-eps. Please read it now. If you find nits (spelling errors, minor suggested wording changes, etc), comment to the authors; if you find greater issues, such as disagreeing with a statement or finding additional issues that need to be addressed, please post your comments to the list.

We are looking specifically for comments on the importance of the document as well as its content. If you have read the document and believe it to be of operational utility, that is also an important comment to make.

---

From: Cameron Byrne <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 15:54:05 -0700

This draft is important and should be published

minor suggestions:

"With the impending exhaustion of available IPv4 addresses
   from the registries there is an increased emphasis for operators to
   migrate to IPv6."

Change "impending" to "on going".  APNIC is already exhausted.

================

"However, the support for IPv6
   in commercially deployed networks by the end of 2010 is nearly non-
   existent."

Verizon Wireless commercially supports IPv6 and i remain hopeful that
other LTE offerings will be IPv6 enabled as well.

Perhaps "...the support for IPv6
   in commercially deployed networks remains low"

============

"In addition to operating dual-
   stack networks during the transition from IPv4 to IPv6 phase, the two
   alternative categories for the transition are encapsulation and
   translation.  Most of the mechanisms available in the toolbox can be
   categorized into either translation or encapsulation approaches."

This last sentence is repetitive and  should be removed or revised.

===============

"Standard NAT44 functionality
       enables the communication between hosts that are assigned the
       same IPv4 address but belong to different zones, yet are part of
       the same operator domain."

I don't believe "standard NAT44" will do this.  If i am behind a NAT44
and want to make a SIP call to someone else behind NAT44 ... i will
need a B2BUE to proxy signalling and media.  You may want to revise
this to simply say that "NAT44 allows for communication from the
RFC1918 private address space to the Internet".

===========

Thanks,
Cameron

On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 6:04 AM, Fred Baker <[email-masked]> wrote:
> This is to initiate a two week working group last call of
> draft-ietf-v6ops-3gpp-eps. Please read it now. If you find nits (spelling
> errors, minor suggested wording changes, etc), comment to the authors; if
> you find greater issues, such as disagreeing with a statement or finding
> additional issues that need to be addressed, please post your comments to
> the list.
> We are looking specifically for comments on the importance of the document
> as well as its content. If you have read the document and believe it to be
> of operational utility, that is also an important comment to make.
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>
>

---

From: jouni korhonen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 12:27:55 +0300

Hi Cameron,

Thanks for the review. Appreciated. See my responses inline.

> Change "impending" to "on going".  APNIC is already exhausted.

Ack. Will change.

Ack. Will change.

Ok to remove the last sentence.

Right. How about:

   1.  Very large network deployments are partitioned, for example,
       based on a geographical areas.  This partitioning allows for
       overlapping IPv4 addresses ranges to be assigned to hosts that
       are in different areas.  Each area has its own pool of gateways
       that are dedicated for a certain overlapping IPv4 address range
       (referred here later as a zone).  Standard NAT44 functionality
       allows for communication from the RFC1918 private zone to the
       Internet. Communication between zones require special arrangement,
       such as using intermediate gateways (e.g. Back to Back User Agent
       (B2BUA) in case of SIP).

- Jouni

---

From: Cameron Byrne <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 06:51:42 -0700

>       such as using intermediate gateways (e.g. Back to Back User Agent

Sounds good.

Thanks.

Cb