Hi,
In addition to what Behcet says.
I read the example below. I think it is just an example, but just to
make sure.
Please - do not allocate /64s to end users in a cellular network.
Allocate at least /62s to end users.
This is to allow the smartphone to perform tethering (small network of
wifi devices connecting through the smartphone to the Internet).
The assumption of /64 to end user is not good at all.
(and yes, I agree that these /62s may be aggregated into a larger prefix
and advertised upstream as a single prefix instead of multiple
host-based routes).
Yours,
Alex Petrescu
Le 26/05/2015 22:34, Behcet Sarikaya a écrit :
Hi Satoru,
Thanks for your reply.
Let me continue the discussion with your text in Section 3.2 where you mention
vEPC may utilizes Forwarding Policy Configuration Protocol (FPCP)
that defines FPCP Agent function and Client function.
I don't understand how you could justify defining a new forwarding
policy configuration protocol to do this Agent/Client functionality?
Why not use similar Agent/Client models that are being defined rather
than defining a new protocol?
I think this point requires much stronger justification which I could
not see in Section 3.2.
Are you that we have to to reinvent the wheel, rather than reusing
something that is already available? How are we going to reinvent that
wheel also remains to be seen, I think.
Regards,
Behcet
On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 8:01 AM, Satoru Matsushima
<satoru.matsush...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Bechet-san,
Thank you for your question.
In step (15), I meant that EPC-E advertises prefix including UE assigned
prefixes.
For example, in the case of /64 prefixes assigned to UEs from a /56 space,
that /56
is advertised by EPC-E to upstream routers. So the advertised route isn't
host routes.
Depends on configuration policy, but one case is that the source of that
advertised
/56 route might be statically configured in EPC-E.
Regards,
--satoru
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 4:51 AM, Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi Matsushima-san,
I have a question on your draft:
In Sec. 3.2, page 11, you say
In step (15), the EPC-E advertises routes to upstream routers ...
Are these routes static/host routes?
Regards,
Behcet
_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
dmm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
dmm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
