[BEHAVE] Question about scenario 4 in draft-ietf-behave-v4v6-framework-10
buptnoc <buptnoc@gmail.com> Fri, 29 April 2011 01:58 UTC
Return-Path: <buptnoc@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: behave@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: behave@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4BC2E0715 for <behave@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 18:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 3.125
X-Spam-Level: ***
X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.125 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.422, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_FONT_FACE_BAD=0.884, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lzYYmnLYB4GV for <behave@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 18:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pw0-f44.google.com (mail-pw0-f44.google.com [209.85.160.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 662C2E0713 for <behave@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 18:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pwi5 with SMTP id 5so1970660pwi.31 for <behave@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 18:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=5556NO6huMWGdhRKXWmzwThUWolI1uCqL4mgxuXIyRQ=; b=BWeAES18gMdffucd4ni9shWPAbwoEQvaZvgN0bsq+tF4Qvhq0CRg0Ik7GXxOv1acpZ Q15AZxs8PvJUVnYzuXYyZjzr1kdp3Pf2/48/DG9sEOXkYZ2nGkp/Eu+rT0XTYhSOXIOi 9BTv2RNZlOX+5Jlr/3lxEhvL2QDCiRm5Ump2s=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=QssUNVVgV6fYc/ckoB9SmlpXTE3sdc4yMi/m3HcRu/x+rSDLINMIa+AvZV/H8agTfO 3U5VC6R5dP6VLZztp13uTftEw0ZePJ6R153ht7YKZ7D3JKiwbsCQZDzohVBeFtxL81Cn rHimj1a1z/d1mBdhRj0WyXwgMfH09TkxzV9CQ=
Received: by 10.68.48.100 with SMTP id k4mr4629112pbn.160.1304042312011; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 18:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [210.25.132.207] ([210.25.132.207]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z10sm1576806pbi.48.2011.04.28.18.58.29 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 28 Apr 2011 18:58:31 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4DBA1B45.2060906@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 09:58:29 +0800
From: buptnoc <buptnoc@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; zh-CN; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: behave@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/html; charset="GB2312"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: [BEHAVE] Question about scenario 4 in draft-ietf-behave-v4v6-framework-10
X-BeenThere: behave@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: mailing list of BEHAVE IETF WG <behave.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/behave>
List-Post: <mailto:behave@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 01:58:32 -0000
As described in http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-behave-v6v4-framework-10#section-2.4" rel="nofollow">draft-ietf-behave-v6v4-framework-10#section-2.4 ， we need nat46 translator.
But, do we really need this scenario？Is it worth to deploy this scenario?
In fact, this scenario appears when we have v4-only client and v6-only servers! How can v6-only servers benefit ISP or ICP?
Thank you !
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-behave-v6v4-framework-10#section-2.4" rel="nofollow">
- [BEHAVE] Question about scenario 4 in draft-ietf-… buptnoc
- [BEHAVE] RFC 6147 section 5.1.4 help. Stephan Lagerholm
- Re: [BEHAVE] RFC 6147 section 5.1.4 help. Mark Andrews