Subject: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-siit-eam WGLC

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2015 11:00:02 -0700

This is to initiate a two week working group last call of
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-siit-eam.  
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: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 11:26:48 +0000

Tore/Alberto,

At the end of the A.1 section you have text that says "Note that this is the exact opposite of the SIIT-DC use case".  At the end of the A.3 section you have text that says  "Note that this is the exact opposite of the 464XLAT use case".

It's not clear to me what is "opposite" referring to.   Do you even need these two sentences in the document?

Thanks,

Hemant

-----Original Message-----
From: v6ops [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Fred Baker (fred)
Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2015 2:00 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-siit-eam WGLC

This is to initiate a two week working group last call of http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-siit-eam.  
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: Tore Anderson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 14:03:50 +0200

Hi Hemant,

* Hemant Singh (shemant)

> At the end of the A.1 section you have text that says "Note that this
> is the exact opposite of the SIIT-DC use case".  At the end of the
> A.3 section you have text that says  "Note that this is the exact
> opposite of the 464XLAT use case".
> 
> It's not clear to me what is "opposite" referring to.

The use cases are opposite to each other, e.g.:

- A.1 (464XLAT) is opposite to A.3 (SIIT-DC)
- A.3 (SIIT-DC) is opposite to A.1 (464XLAT)

...in the sense that an IPv4 packet traversing a 464XLAT CLAT and being
tranlated to IPv6 is sent by a local IPv4 app and is destined
for the public Internet, while an IPv4 packet traversing an SIIT-DC
gateway is sent from the public Internet and is destined for a local
IPv4 service.

> Do you even need these two sentences in the document?

No, probably not. We'll remove them, thanks!

Tore

---

From: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 14:22:55 +0000

Tore,

Thanks for the explanation - got it.  Sounds good to remove the statements.  Other than that, the document looks good to me. 

Thanks,

Hemant

-----Original Message-----
From: Tore Anderson [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 8:04 AM
To: Hemant Singh (shemant)
Cc: Fred Baker (fred); [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-siit-eam WGLC

Hi Hemant,

* Hemant Singh (shemant)

...in the sense that an IPv4 packet traversing a 464XLAT CLAT and being tranlated to IPv6 is sent by a local IPv4 app and is destined for the public Internet, while an IPv4 packet traversing an SIIT-DC gateway is sent from the public Internet and is destined for a local
IPv4 service.

Tore