>> Actually, my motivation is NOT to sell this mechanism to anyone. My >observation is some network operators, both ISPs and enterprise network >operator, has such address plan, or already in use. We, as IETF, cannot stop >them. So, we should document and analyze this mechanism. This should give >some information to these who have not made their address plan yet on >whether they may follow or not. > >Sheng, are those ISPs and enterprises already contributors within the IETF? >Can you say any more about who these are, and examples of the semantics >actually being deployed? I assume China Telecom and Deutsche Telekom are >two of them.
Hi, Tim, Actually, in the appendixes there are one example for ISP and one for enterprise. The example for ISP (Appendix A) is mainly abstracted from China Telecom's address plan. As far as I know, China Telecom and China Mobile have very similar address plan. Deutsche Telekom's plan has much more complicated semantics, which I personally think has bigger technical gaps to become deployable. The enterprise example (Appendix B) is abstracted from an ongoing project that connect all video monitors in a big city and their real-time video into an IP intranet. >As you say, at the moment the draft reads as a proposal, rather than an >analysis of something already in use. Some concrete examples may help. I guess the introduction and abstract sections have to be rewritten for better explanation. It is now misleading so much. Thanks, Sheng >Tim -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
