On 2008-11-18 09:03, Daniel Park wrote: > Brian (ccing 16ng list) > > On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 12:12 PM, Brian E Carpenter < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Daniel, >> >> On 2008-11-14 22:19, Daniel Park wrote: >>> John, >>> >>> I would make a minor change according to the valuable comments from the >>> WiMAX expert: >>> >>> There are two ways to transfer IPv6 over WiMAX: >>> - IPv6 over WiMAX using IPCS: RFC5121 >>> - IPv6 over Ethernet carried over WiMAX: AD Evaluation (ID Status) >> Where does your suggested preference for the IPv6 CS come from? >> Does 16ng have a consensus on this preference? >> >> Since I can't imagine anyone *not* implementing the Ethernet CS, >> doesn't this make extra work for all implementors, compared >> with preferring the Ethernet CS for both IP versions? > > > We had long discussion on that before..:-) Yes, IPv6CS (RFC5121) comes from > 16ng WG. And EthernetCS is too. Prebably, the consensus you mentioned above > means which CS is a mandatory or optional for IPv6 implementation or > both. Well, 16ng WG just leaves them to the business choice in WiMAX > networks since that is beyond scope of 16ng. As of today, obviously mobile > biz wants to implement IPv6CS only, and wired biz (looks like DSL) wants to > implemt EthernetCS. But, no one knows what happens tomorrow in WiMAX > networks.
Then it seems to me there is no useful statement to be made in the node requirements document. If 16ng has no recommendation, I don't see how 6man can decide. Thanks Brian -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
