Subject: [v6ops] v6ops - Draft minutes Monday March 26th 0900

From: Joel jaeggli <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2012 10:22:21 +0200

0900 meeting commences

Agenda Bashing
	6204bis dicussion is moved to thursday.

	draft-carpenter-v6ops-label-balance moves to moday

Fred -
	iesg is asking about interim meeting to coincided with ripe
	meeting e.g. 24-28th of sept

Question, how many will be a at ripe anyway?
Answer, about a dozen hands.

Low hum in favor. No opposition.

First presentation - Experiences from IPv6-Only Networks with Transition
Technologies in the WIDE Camp Spring 2012

http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/83/slides/slides-83-v6ops-0.pdf

	mtu issues particularly with udp vpn applications

	many implmentation issues with nat64 and dns64

Fred  B -
	Question, long term plans for the draft?

	Answer, and camp in sept updated version of the draft will
	follow.
	
Second presentation - draft-donley-behave-deterministic-cgn-01

http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/83/slides/slides-83-v6ops-1.pdf

	hinges on the question of address assignment efficiency  due to
	fixed assignment of port resources.

	documented in draft that compression works fairly well between
	10-100 users per ip.

Fred B -
	Postponing question of whether would should take it until it
	ADs get back to us.

test for donneley (done after following presentation)
	hum (mostly in favor) (minor opposition)

Third presentation - NAT64 Operational Experience

http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/83/slides/slides-83-v6ops-2.ppt

	comments leading to updates of draft-chen-v6ops-nat64-
	experience-01

	Moake chen - same question on the mtu statement

	Iljitsch B - so the ipv4 servers should set their mtu to at
	least 1260. good work item for v4 exit wg.

Fred B -
	hold off or do it now?
	assuming there is no v4 exit is this a document suitable for
	this wg?

	hum (no support for) (or against)

Fourth Presentation - 464XLAT Combination of Stateful and Stateless
Translation

http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/83/slides/slides-83-v6ops-3.ppt

	Lorenzo C - like this as a hack to bring carrier pigeon quality
	v4 to v6 only devices.

	don't understand why the device needs a /96 (teathering) should
	should work with a /128

Fred B -
	history of draft
	ask softwire and behave chairs what they thought of it.

	right resolution to the narmative language is to split the
	document into the bcp for providing the service and another
	draft on the implementation report. seperate them.

	Lorenzo C - it's not a bcp right, you can do this using
	existing technology

	Philip M - service providers like standards.

	Janos M - I am very much against BCP

	Remi D - Support informational think coordination with software
	is required.

	Hui D - useful as short term before 3gpp rel 8

Question, does /96 requirement removal, remove objections to progress?

Answer, 6 hands consider it a problem, 3 would not object after removal.

Fifth Presentation -  Stateless Source address mapping for ICMPv6 packets

http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/83/slides/slides-83-v6ops-5.ppt

Fred B -  we'll take it to WG last call on the mailing list.

Sixth Presentation - IPv6 Guidance for Internet Content and Application
Service Providers

	Lee H - it's a good doc

	Erik K - it's probably a good starting point.

Hum for acceptance (some yes ) (no opposition)

Fred B - repost as draft IETF

Seventh Presentation - IPv6 Flow label for server load balancing

http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/83/slides/slides-83-v6ops-8.ppt

	Iljitsch B -  it's dangerous to assume that the flow label is
	never going to change mid-session

	Lorenzo C - if the lb trusts the client to determine lb then
	you probably need to reset the label on ingress

	the draft should state that you don't trust the end host flow
	label.

	Erik K - having the policy says that you reserve the high bit
	for labels you set yourself could be worthwhile.

	Iljitsch B - I don't like this draft.

Question, is it a indeterminate candidate for wg or not?

Answer indeterminate hum in favor vs against.

Session complete at 11:27

---

From: Rémi Després <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2012 13:48:15 +0200

Hi, Joel, 

Minor typo correction in what I said:
"coordination with Softwire is required."
                    ^^^ (not software)

Thanks,
RD

Le 2012-04-05 à 10:22, Joel jaeggli a écrit :

> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

---

From: Joel jaeggli <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2012 08:54:57 -0700

thanks

joel