[ipv6-wg] We suggest that RIPE-554bis CPE equipment requires RFC 7084 and CE-Router Logo. Thank you!

Hello, 

Both IPv6 Ready Logo and CE-Router Logo do not test any transition technology.

ISP operators and Vendors can buy commercial test equipments such as Ixia, Spirent to test 6RD, DS-Lite and MAP.

RIPE-554bis can suggest some transition technology, but it is optional.

Thank you!

Best Regards,

Wan-Der Chiou

-----Original Message-----
From: ipv6-wg [mailto:ipv6-wg-bounces at ripe.net] On Behalf Of Eric Vyncke (evyncke)
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 6:36 PM
To: ipv6-wg at ripe.net
Subject: [Marketing Mail] Re: [ipv6-wg] We suggest that RIPE-554bis CPE equipment requires RFC 7084 and CE-Router Logo. Thank you!

OTOH talking about DS-lite & co, my view of RIPE-554 is that it is really useful for SMB or larger enterprises to specify what they have to acquire.
And, I am unsure about the use case of MAP, 6RD,. . .  technologies for this kind of organizations.

SP buying large quantities of ‘managed’ CPE should know by now about 6RD, MAP, … :-) so they do not need RIPE-554 (even if it still useful for part of their networks)

Residential subscribers should indeed only rely on IPv6-ready CPE logo.

-éric


On 7/01/15 11:15, "Mikael Abrahamsson" <swmike at swm.pp.se> wrote:

>On Mon, 5 Jan 2015, Ole Troan wrote:
>
>>>
>>> ．       RFC6204 (Basic Requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge Routers) *
>>>=>
>>> RFC7084 and requires CE-Router Logo <image001.png>
>>
>> the delta between 6204 and 7084 is largely the addition of the 6rd 
>>and DS-lite.
>> since 7084 was published quite a lot has happened on new mechanisms 
>>for
>>IPv4 address sharing. e.g. MAP. I would think 554bis should take those 
>>into account as well.
>
>This is an interesting discussion. MAP and LW4o6 would be interesting 
>mechanisms to require support for, absolutely. I am not sure how much 
>of the control plane for these mechanisms that are actually done and in 
>published RFCs yet, but will look into it!
>
>It's hard to require support for something that might not be 100% done 
>and deployable using available RFCs, even though there are multiple 
>implementations of these already.
>
>-- 
>Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike at swm.pp.se


本信件可能包含中華電信股份有限公司機密資訊,非指定之收件者,請勿蒐集、處理或利用本信件內容,並請銷毀此信件.如為指定收件者,應確實保護郵件中本公司之營業機密及個人資料,不得任意傳佈或揭露,並應自行確認本郵件之附檔與超連結之安全性,以共同善盡資訊安全與個資保護責任.
Please be advised that this email message (including any attachments) contains confidential information and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and all attachments from your system and do not further collect, process, or use them. Chunghwa Telecom and all its subsidiaries and associated companies shall not be liable for the improper or incomplete transmission of the information contained in this email nor for any delay in its receipt or damage to your system. If you are the intended recipient, please protect the confidential and/or personal information contained in this email with due care. Any unauthorized use, disclosure or distribution of this message in whole or in part is strictly prohibited.  Also, please self-inspect attachments and hyperlinks contained in this email to ensure the information security and to protect personal information.