Re: I-D Action:draft-hu-pppext-ipv6cp-requirements-00.txt

FWIW, I agree with James' statements/questions.
-Ignacio Goyret

At 02:48 PM 10/18/2010 -0400, James Carlson wrote:
>>       Title           : PPPv6 Problem statement and requirements
>>       Author(s)       : J. Hu, et al.
>>       Filename        : draft-hu-pppext-ipv6cp-requirements-00.txt
>
>I've read this draft, and I have a few initial fairly high-level
>questions about it before offering any detailed comments.  (And since
>the second draft appears to depend on the first, it seems that this one
>is the right place to start.)
>
>1.  The "Problem Statement" contains many assertions about problems
>    with the design and use of IPv6CP.  But there are many known and
>    interoperable implementations available today.  Are these newly
>    discovered problems?  And do any of the existing implementations
>    suffer from them?  (In other words: "what problems need to be
>    fixed?")
>
>2.  Many of the issues raised are not specifically related to PPP,
>    and are issues any time you have an IPv6 link over any datalink
>    medium, and when used in a particular type of deployment.  Why
>    are the solutions specific to IPv6CP and not general in nature?
>
>3.  Have you read through the working group archives?  Many of these
>    issues have been addressed over the years -- some of them more
>    than once.  In particular, there's established working group
>    consensus that the results of RFC 1877 should not be replicated
>    for IPv6.
>
>-- 
>James Carlson         42.703N 71.076W         <[email protected]>
>_______________________________________________
>Pppext mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pppext

_______________________________________________
Pppext mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pppext