[ipv6-wg] "Requirements For IPv6 in ICT Equipment" comment

It's probably best to start from the existing "Basic Requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge Routers" draft. You might also want to check whether a CPE-focused RIPE document wouldn't reinvent the wheel.

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router-09

Ivan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ipv6-wg-admin at ripe.net [mailto:ipv6-wg-admin at ripe.net] On Behalf Of
> Jan Zorz @ go6.si
> Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2011 1:30 PM
> To: Ahmed Abu-Abed; RIPE IPv6
> Subject: Re: [ipv6-wg] "Requirements For IPv6 in ICT Equipment" comment
> 
> 
> ----- Original message -----
> > My suggestion was to develop a best practice for consumer CPE
> > specifications based on existing IETF standards/drafts.
> >
> > Regards,
> > -Ahmed
> >
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Thank you for suggestion. Mandatory part should not be a big challenge,
> but optional section might be tricky...
> 
> We'll try to compile first beta draft text for the CPE and see if
> community likes it and what we need to change/add.
> 
> best, Jan Zorz
> 
> >
> >
> > From: Marco Hogewoning
> > Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2011 1:22 PM
> > To: Ahmed Abu-Abed
> > Cc: kzorba at otenet.gr ; ipv6-wg at ripe.net
> > Subject: Re: [ipv6-wg] "Requirements For IPv6 in ICT Equipment" comment
> >
> >
> >
> > On 9 jan 2011, at 05:40, Ahmed Abu-Abed wrote:
> >
> > > Good point, and having a Consumer CPE spec as a RIPE standard would
> > > help for last mile access requirements. RIPE-501 only aimed for
> > > government and enterprise deployments.
> >
> > My personal preference would be to keep pointing to the work done in the
> > IETF. The problem with standards is, there usually are too many. Adding
> > another one will only lead to more confusion, let alone the time it will
> > take to get consensus.
> >
> > Grtx,
> >
> > MarcoH
> >
> > --
> > "Good tests kill flawed theories; we remain alive to guess again"