Re: [dhcwg] Call for adoption: draft-sun-dhc-port-set-option

[Qiong <[e-mail]>]

indeed. The contiguous port mask is one example of MAP algorithm. But we
hope to simplify it from both implementation and operational point of view,
by removing all these parameters and algorithms. Contiguous port-set using
port mask is all we need, so we do not need anything more.

And besides, what we need is a DHCPv4 option, not DHCPv6.

Best wishes
Qiong

On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 10:45 PM, Peng Wu <[e-mail]> wrote:

> If we only need contiguous port range as you said, we only need a
> contiguous mask and that's all. Perfect match. No other MAP parameters
> or non-contiguous port set format as an outcome of MAP.
>
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 10:00 PM, Ole Trøan <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >> This draft does proposed a contiguous mask to allocate contiguous
> port-set. And the draft is a merged version of
> >> draft-wu-dhc-port-set-option-00 and draft-bajko-pripaddrassign-04. The
> authors have reached the consensus to use mask for contiguous port-set
> allocation, which is easy to implement both for client and server.
> >
> > if this proposal is also advocating a contiguous mask, then I don't
> understand why you cannot use the proposal in draft-ietf-softwire-map?
> >
> > cheers,
> > Ole
> >
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
>



-- 
==============================================
Qiong Sun
China Telecom Beijing Research Institude


Open source code:
lightweight 4over6: *http://sourceforge.net/projects/laft6/*
PCP-natcoord:* http://sourceforge.net/projects/pcpportsetdemo/ *
===============================================