From mohamed.boucadair@orange.com Fri Jun 7 05:49:08 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: fmc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: fmc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DECD21F9248; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 05:49:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.248 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.248 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fFHAmVBuNCpR; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 05:49:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relais-inet.francetelecom.com (relais-ias91.francetelecom.com [193.251.215.91]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CB9321F8667; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 05:49:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from omfedm05.si.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.1]) by omfedm13.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 7F4FA324618; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 14:49:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from PUEXCH21.nanterre.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.101.44.28]) by omfedm05.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 5E92A35C055; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 14:49:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr ([10.101.44.13]) by PUEXCH21.nanterre.francetelecom.fr ([10.101.44.28]) with mapi; Fri, 7 Jun 2013 14:49:03 +0200 From: To: "Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de" , "jshire@hyduke.com" , "fmc@ietf.org" , "int-area@ietf.org" Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2013 14:49:02 +0200 Thread-Topic: draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios Thread-Index: Ac5LMjyqGqkODLucTvmk2Pl+E8NMBwRSW5PQAcA/rRA= Message-ID: <94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F36ED58ED02C@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr> References: <94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F36ECE1436BE@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr> <05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A2BBFB11613@HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> In-Reply-To: <05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A2BBFB11613@HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> Accept-Language: fr-FR Content-Language: fr-FR X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: fr-FR Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-PMX-Version: 5.6.1.2065439, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.376379, Antispam-Data: 2013.5.21.113319 Cc: "draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios@tools.ietf.org" Subject: Re: [fmc] draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios X-BeenThere: fmc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Fixed Mobile Convergence List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2013 12:49:08 -0000 Hi Dirk, NAT46 is not mentioned in the document because it not a scenario of high pr= iority (please refer to behave WG charter for instance).=20 Saying that, I don't think we need to be exhaustive in listing all NAT flav= ors there; what is important is to characterize the use case. Cheers, Med=20 >-----Message d'origine----- >De=A0: Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de [mailto:Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de] >Envoy=E9=A0: mercredi 29 mai 2013 17:11 >=C0=A0: BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/OLN; jshire@hyduke.com; fmc@ietf.org; int- >area@ietf.org >Cc=A0: draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios@tools.ietf.org >Objet=A0: RE: draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios > >Hi Med, all, >I see also the section 3.7 on femto cells with high security demands for >tunneled (mobile) data via IPSec through the fixed network. > >Another question is whether to include also a scenario for NAT46 addressin= g >IPv4 clients at end user nodes connected to both IPv6 RGW and IPv6 access >network? I think while many operators are starting to deploy IPv6 in thei= r >core and aggregation networks there will always be (maybe old fashioned) >customers which continue to use their available equipment, e.g. for >telephony. >Perhaps this is already handled, e.g. in UC 3.6, but I couldn't find NAT46 >to be mentioned. Did I miss something? > >What do you think? >Thanks! > >Best regards >Dirk >-----Original Message----- >From: fmc-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:fmc-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of >mohamed.boucadair@orange.com >Sent: Dienstag, 7. Mai 2013 16:51 >To: 'Joshua Shire'; fmc@ietf.org; int-area@ietf.org >Cc: draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios@tools.ietf.org >Subject: Re: [fmc] draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios > >Dear Joshua, > >Apologies for the delay to answer this message. > >I see your point. I will add it to the list of items to be considered for >the next iteration of the document. > >BTW, -03 already included some of requirements which cover security aspect= s >(see for instance REQ#1, REQ#2, REQ#3, REQ#9). Once we have a stable >requirements list, we will identify the requirements which are valid for >each use case: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-boucadair-intarea-host- >identifier-scenarios-03#section-4.1 > >Cheers, >Med > >>-----Message d'origine----- >>De : Joshua Shire [mailto:jshire@hyduke.com] >>Envoy=E9 : vendredi 25 janvier 2013 08:17 >>=C0 : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/OLN; fmc@ietf.org; int-area@ietf.org >>Cc : draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios@tools.ietf.org >>Objet : RE: draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios >> >>Hello, >> >>I do not believe a pointer to >>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-intarea-nat-reveal-analys >>is-04#section-3 will be satisfactory for the security >>considerations section. >> >>http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3552.txt states that when writing >>a security considerations section, the process "...should be >>approached as an effort to perform "due diligence" in >>describing all known or foreseeable risks and threats to >>potential implementers and users." Normally we see RFCs >>describing more applied topics such as protocols, so the >>specific language and examples given in the above mentioned >>RFC may not seem directly applicable. However, "in spirit", >>the document seems clear in requiring all RFCs to examine in >>detail their potential security impact. >> >>As I'm sure we're all aware, some of the use cases identified >>are purposefully implemented to maintain the confidentiality >>of a client's identity (e.g. NAT to obfuscate the structure of >>an enterprise network, Open-Wifi to conceal the identity of a >>client under threat of persecution [or prosecution], etc.). >> >>Thus, in identifying these scenarios as sharing the "issue" of >>host identification, the author would seem to be required to >>discuss the potential security implications of treating the >>lack of host identification as such, rather than a desirable feature. >> >>Thanks, >> >>Joshua Shire >>Information Systems Manager >>Hyduke Energy Services Inc. >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: int-area-bounces@ietf.org >>[mailto:int-area-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of >>mohamed.boucadair@orange.com >>Sent: Monday, December 03, 2012 2:08 AM >>To: fmc@ietf.org; int-area@ietf.org >>Cc: draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios@tools.ietf.org >>Subject: [Int-area] draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios >> >>Dear all, >> >>We submitted an updated version of this draft to list use >>cases which encounter the issue of host identification. The >>following use cases are discussed in the draft: >> >> (1) Carrier Grade NAT (CGN) >> (2) A+P (e.g., MAP ) >> (3) Application Proxies >> (4) Provider Wi-Fi >> (5) Policy and Charging Architectures >> (6) Cellular Networks >> (7) Femtocells >> (8) Overlay Networks (e.g., CDNs) >> >>The document does not include any solution-specific >>discussion. Its main goal is to identify the use cases and >>describe them. >> >>If you think your use case is not included in this version, >>please share it with us. >> >>Comments are welcome. >> >>Cheers, >>Med >> >> >>-----Message d'origine----- >>De : i-d-announce-bounces@ietf.org >>[mailto:i-d-announce-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de >>internet-drafts@ietf.org Envoy=E9 : lundi 3 d=E9cembre 2012 08:26 >>=C0 : i-d-announce@ietf.org Objet : I-D Action: >>draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios-02.txt >> >> >>A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line >>Internet-Drafts directories. >> >> >> Title : Host Identification: Use Cases >> Author(s) : Mohamed Boucadair >> David Binet >> Sophie Durel >> Tirumaleswar Reddy >> Brandon Williams >> Filename : >>draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identifier-scenarios-02.txt >> Pages : 14 >> Date : 2012-12-02 >> >>Abstract: >> This document describes a set of scenarios in which host >> identification is required. >> >> >>The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-boucadair-intarea-host-i >>dentifier-scenarios >> >>There's also a htmlized version available at: >>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-boucadair-intarea-host-identif >>ier-scenarios-02 >> >>A diff from the previous version is available at: >>http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-boucadair-intarea-host-i >>dentifier-scenarios-02 >> >> >>Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >>ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >> >>_______________________________________________ >>I-D-Announce mailing list >>I-D-Announce@ietf.org >>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce >>Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or >>ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >>_______________________________________________ >>Int-area mailing list >>Int-area@ietf.org >>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area >> >_______________________________________________ >fmc mailing list >fmc@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/fmc From Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de Fri Jun 14 08:46:24 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: fmc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: fmc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04D4D21F9C62 for ; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 08:46:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.248 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.248 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bDprhxmc2LFD for ; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 08:46:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tcmail43.telekom.de (tcmail43.telekom.de [80.149.113.173]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00DE121F9CEB for ; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 08:46:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from he113675.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.134.99.28]) by tcmail41.telekom.de with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 14 Jun 2013 17:46:17 +0200 Received: from HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.134.93.124]) by HE113675.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([::1]) with mapi; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 17:46:16 +0200 From: To: Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 17:46:15 +0200 Thread-Topic: status of fmc bof Thread-Index: Ac5pFQ0hAzadXtpnS3yh/UjITe0WqwAAL8aA Message-ID: <05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A2BC05D5263@HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> References: <05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A2BC05D525A@HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, de-DE Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US, de-DE Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A2BC05D5263HE113484emea1_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: sarikaya@ieee.org, mohamed.boucadair@orange.com, brian@innovationslab.net Subject: Re: [fmc] status of fmc bof X-BeenThere: fmc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Fixed Mobile Convergence List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 15:46:24 -0000 --_000_05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A2BC05D5263HE113484emea1_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear all, as you may remember we had focused the discussion in this list on how an en= d host can be identified correctly e.g. behind NATed gateways. Due to recen= t developments we decided to reduce the scope to prefix and address sharing= topic and move the BOF to OPS area. We already have drafted a reformulated= corresponding text on the wiki (http://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/trac/wiki/W= ikiStart) and renamed the provisional BOF request to PAAS. Please comment on the list, join the discussion and participate in improvem= ent of the BoF request including the problem description and the proposed c= harter. Also please think of submitting a solution draft. Your valuable contributions are very much appreciated. Thanks! Best regards Behcet and Dirk --_000_05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A2BC05D5263HE113484emea1_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear all,


as you may remember we had focused the dis= cussion in this list on how an end host can be identified correctly e.g. be= hind NATed gateways. Due to recent developments we decided to reduce the sc= ope to prefix and address sharing topic and move the BOF to OPS area. We al= ready have drafted a reformulated corresponding text on the wiki (h= ttp://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/trac/wiki/WikiStart) and renamed the prov= isional BOF request to PAAS.


Please comment on the list, join the discussi= on and participate in improvement of the BoF request including the problem = description and the proposed charter. 


Also please think of submitting a solution draft.

 

Your valuable = contributions are very much appreciated.

Thanks!

 

Best regards
Behcet and Dirk

= --_000_05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A2BC05D5263HE113484emea1_-- From Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de Fri Jun 28 00:45:07 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: fmc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: fmc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92C8421F9943 for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 00:45:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.649 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.649 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EkJptJxPEn3n for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 00:44:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tcmail93.telekom.de (tcmail93.telekom.de [80.149.113.205]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49E8021F9D21 for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 00:44:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from he111631.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.134.93.23]) by tcmail91.telekom.de with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 28 Jun 2013 09:44:43 +0200 Received: from HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.134.93.124]) by HE111631.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([::1]) with mapi; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 09:44:43 +0200 From: To: Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 09:44:41 +0200 Thread-Topic: status of fmc bof / PAAS Thread-Index: Ac5z0roqT8ixLBXBSJO5zR7+rkhNKA== Message-ID: <05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A2C5201B52E@HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> Accept-Language: en-US, de-DE Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US, de-DE Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A2C5201B52EHE113484emea1_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: joelja@bogus.com, sarikaya@ieee.org, mohamed.boucadair@orange.com Subject: Re: [fmc] status of fmc bof / PAAS X-BeenThere: fmc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Fixed Mobile Convergence List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 07:45:07 -0000 --_000_05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A2C5201B52EHE113484emea1_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear all, Our planned BarBOF meeting in Berlin will presumably be on Monday at luncht= ime. We should discuss on the proper problem statement on addressing, ident= ifying and localizing end user terminals - where to scope for starting the = work. Two of the most demanded use cases may be the location issue for emer= gency calls as mandated e.g. by European Commission in M/493 and the BBF wh= ere the prefix sharing problem (aka host identifier issue) has been identif= ied. Solution drafts are also welcome ;-) Further proposals and comments - also just expression of interest - are str= ongly encouraged. Hope to see you in Berlin! Best regards Dirk BTW: PAAS should denote Prefix And Address Sharing From: fmc-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:fmc-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of von H= ugo, Dirk Sent: Freitag, 14. Juni 2013 17:46 To: fmc@ietf.org Cc: sarikaya@ieee.org; mohamed.boucadair@orange.com; brian@innovationslab.n= et Subject: Re: [fmc] status of fmc bof Dear all, as you may remember we had focused the discussion in this list on how an en= d host can be identified correctly e.g. behind NATed gateways. Due to recen= t developments we decided to reduce the scope to prefix and address sharing= topic and move the BOF to OPS area. We already have drafted a reformulated= corresponding text on the wiki (http://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/trac/wiki/W= ikiStart) and renamed the provisional BOF request to PAAS. Please comment on the list, join the discussion and participate in improvem= ent of the BoF request including the problem description and the proposed c= harter. Also please think of submitting a solution draft. Your valuable contributions are very much appreciated. Thanks! Best regards Behcet and Dirk --_000_05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A2C5201B52EHE113484emea1_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear all,=

Our planned BarBOF meetin= g in Berlin will presumably be on Monday at lunchtime. We should discuss on= the proper problem statement on addressing, identifying and localizing end= user terminals – where to scope for starting the work. Two of the mo= st demanded use cases may be the location issue for emergency calls as mand= ated e.g. by European Commission in M/493 and the BBF where the prefix shar= ing problem (aka host identifier issue) has been identified.

 

Solution drafts are also welcome ;-)

<= p class=3DMsoNormal> 

Further proposals and comments - also just expression of interest -= are strongly encouraged.

=  

Hope to see you in = Berlin!

 <= /span>

Best regards

Dirk

 

BTW: PAAS shoul= d denote Prefix And Address Sharing

From: fmc-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:fmc-bounces@ietf.org] = On Behalf Of von Hugo, Dirk
Sent: Freitag, 14. Juni 2013 17:4= 6
To: fmc@ietf.org
Cc: sarikaya@ieee.org; mohamed.bouca= dair@orange.com; brian@innovationslab.net
Subject: Re: [fmc] stat= us of fmc bof

&n= bsp;

Dear all,


as you may remember we had focused the discussion in this list on = how an end host can be identified correctly e.g. behind NATed gateways. Due= to recent developments we decided to reduce the scope to prefix and addres= s sharing topic and move the BOF to OPS area. We already have drafted a ref= ormulated corresponding text on the wiki (http://trac.tools.ietf.org/= bof/trac/wiki/WikiStart) and renamed the provisional BOF request to PAA= S.

=
Please comment on the list, join the discussion and participate in impr= ovement of the BoF request including the problem description and the propos= ed charter. 


Also please think = of submitting a solution draft.

&nb= sp;

Your valua= ble contributions are very much appreciated.

Thanks!

 

Best regards
Behcet and Dirk

<= /html>= --_000_05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A2C5201B52EHE113484emea1_-- From david.i.allan@ericsson.com Fri Jun 28 12:44:19 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: fmc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: fmc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D1FA21F9C18 for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 12:44:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vtin+qIY4Rzn for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 12:44:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usevmg21.ericsson.net (usevmg21.ericsson.net [198.24.6.65]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F9B921F9C16 for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 12:44:13 -0700 (PDT) X-AuditID: c6180641-b7f986d000007a82-f0-51cde787a6ce Received: from EUSAAHC001.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.75]) by usevmg21.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 10.30.31362.787EDC15; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 21:44:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EUSAAMB105.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.122]) by EUSAAHC001.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.75]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.009; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 15:44:06 -0400 From: David Allan I To: "Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de" , "fmc@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: status of fmc bof / PAAS Thread-Index: Ac5z0roqT8ixLBXBSJO5zR7+rkhNKAAZQvaQ Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 19:44:06 +0000 Message-ID: References: <05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A2C5201B52E@HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> In-Reply-To: <05C81A773E48DD49B181B04BA21A342A2C5201B52E@HE113484.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.134] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_E6C17D2345AC7A45B7D054D407AA205C113075A1eusaamb105erics_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFmpmkeLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42KZXLrHW7f9+dlAg2trTCxaFm5ls/iz5gWj xatTaxgtDr99ym4xu/c0iwOrx9kjCxg9nk44yOSxZMlPJo+WZyfZPNpeKgSwRnHZpKTmZJal FunbJXBlnP/awlLwLaZi8+xZbA2Mr4O6GDk5JARMJGZMncIMYYtJXLi3nq2LkYtDSOAoo8Tu XQ/YIZzljBJPPx9nB6liEzCQ2PP/CyOILSIQJXH05X9WkCJmgamMEosO3mQDSQgLqErcvn0B yOYAKlKTWNQVDFFvJHFr2WewbSxAJZvenAabySvgK7HwRR8TiC0ENHP9p7esIDanQLTE/WeT wOKMQNd9P7UGzGYWEJe49WQ+E8TVAhJL9pyH+kBU4uXjf6wQtrLEkif7WSDq8yUu969mgtgl KHFy5hOWCYyis5CMmoWkbBaSMoi4jsSC3Z/YIGxtiWULXzPD2GcOPGZCFl/AyL6KkaO0OLUs N93IcBMjMCKPSbA57mBc8MnyEKM0B4uSOO8GvTOBQgLpiSWp2ampBalF8UWlOanFhxiZODil GhhnezcpnvjwuWnGk+nmKoe9OaWfnetZxCdyd2O98AYpLj0NJ4MrTzPfZx67M2l+uOW1wy+t +gMF1xsFCgpMyg05+ufhPQHDVd//H4pguNGVxlNYFP5gzl/X2up3eWY8nLoZF9e++HjvfWWb ssyPHTJCaydmMf3pT231lgkzys9i0fW4mPro9DwlluKMREMt5qLiRAD3+pN7lgIAAA== Cc: "joelja@bogus.com" , "sarikaya@ieee.org" , "mohamed.boucadair@orange.com" Subject: Re: [fmc] status of fmc bof / PAAS X-BeenThere: fmc@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Fixed Mobile Convergence List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 19:44:19 -0000 --_000_E6C17D2345AC7A45B7D054D407AA205C113075A1eusaamb105erics_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable HI When you mention prefix sharing, are you referring to IPv6 PD or NAT... or = both... Thanks Dave From: fmc-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:fmc-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Dirk.= von-Hugo@telekom.de Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 12:45 AM To: fmc@ietf.org Cc: joelja@bogus.com; sarikaya@ieee.org; mohamed.boucadair@orange.com Subject: Re: [fmc] status of fmc bof / PAAS Dear all, Our planned BarBOF meeting in Berlin will presumably be on Monday at luncht= ime. We should discuss on the proper problem statement on addressing, ident= ifying and localizing end user terminals - where to scope for starting the = work. Two of the most demanded use cases may be the location issue for emer= gency calls as mandated e.g. by European Commission in M/493 and the BBF wh= ere the prefix sharing problem (aka host identifier issue) has been identif= ied. Solution drafts are also welcome ;-) Further proposals and comments - also just expression of interest - are str= ongly encouraged. Hope to see you in Berlin! Best regards Dirk BTW: PAAS should denote Prefix And Address Sharing From: fmc-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:fmc-bounces= @ietf.org] On Behalf Of von Hugo, Dirk Sent: Freitag, 14. Juni 2013 17:46 To: fmc@ietf.org Cc: sarikaya@ieee.org; mohamed.boucadair@orange.c= om; brian@innovationslab.net Subject: Re: [fmc] status of fmc bof Dear all, as you may remember we had focused the discussion in this list on how an en= d host can be identified correctly e.g. behind NATed gateways. Due to recen= t developments we decided to reduce the scope to prefix and address sharing= topic and move the BOF to OPS area. We already have drafted a reformulated= corresponding text on the wiki (http://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/trac/wiki/W= ikiStart) and renamed the provisional BOF request to PAAS. Please comment on the list, join the discussion and participate in improvem= ent of the BoF request including the problem description and the proposed c= harter. Also please think of submitting a solution draft. Your valuable contributions are very much appreciated. Thanks! Best regards Behcet and Dirk --_000_E6C17D2345AC7A45B7D054D407AA205C113075A1eusaamb105erics_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

HI

 <= /p>

When you mention prefix s= haring, are you referring to IPv6 PD or NAT… or both…

 <= /p>

Thanks<= /p>

Dave

 <= /p>

From: fmc-boun= ces@ietf.org [mailto:fmc-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 12:45 AM
To: fmc@ietf.org
Cc: joelja@bogus.com; sarikaya@ieee.org; mohamed.boucadair@orange.co= m
Subject: Re: [fmc] status of fmc bof / PAAS

 

Dear all,

Our planned BarBOF meetin= g in Berlin will presumably be on Monday at lunchtime. We should discuss on= the proper problem statement on addressing, identifying and localizing end user terminals – where to scope for starting the = work. Two of the most demanded use cases may be the location issue for emer= gency calls as mandated e.g. by European Commission in M/493 and the BBF wh= ere the prefix sharing problem (aka host identifier issue) has been identified.

 <= /p>

Solution drafts are also = welcome ;-)

 <= /p>

Further proposals and com= ments - also just expression of interest - are strongly encouraged.

 <= /p>

Hope to see you in Berlin= !

 <= /p>

Best regards

Dirk

 <= /p>

BTW: PAAS should denote P= refix And Address Sharing

From: fmc-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:fmc-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of von Hugo, Dirk
Sent: Freitag, 14. Juni 2013 17:46
To: fmc@ietf.org
Cc: sarikaya@ieee.org; mohamed.boucadair@orange.com; brian@innovationslab.net
Subject: Re: [fmc] status of fmc bof

 

Dear all,


as you may remember we had focused the discussion in this list on how an en= d host can be identified correctly e.g. behind NATed gateways. Due to recen= t developments we decided to reduce the scope to prefix and address sharing= topic and move the BOF to OPS area. We already have drafted a reformulated corresponding text on the wiki (http://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/trac/wiki/WikiStart) and renamed the = provisional BOF request to PAAS.


Please comment on the list, join the discussion and participate in improvem= ent of the BoF request including the problem description and the proposed c= harter. 


Also please think of submitting a solution draft.

 

Your valuable contrib= utions are very much appreciated.

Thanks!

 

Best regards
Behcet and Dirk

--_000_E6C17D2345AC7A45B7D054D407AA205C113075A1eusaamb105erics_--