Re: [pcp] Lw4o6 or DS-Lite? (Re: WG Call for Adoption: The Port Control Protocol in Dual-Stack Lite environments)

"bingxuere@gmail.com" <bingxuere@gmail.com> Tue, 21 May 2013 12:49 UTC

Return-Path: <bingxuere@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: pcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 081D521F961C for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 May 2013 05:49:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.202
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396]
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 sHCRCKpD79yp for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 May 2013 05:49:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pb0-x236.google.com (mail-pb0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50D5921F88AC for <pcp@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 May 2013 05:49:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pb0-f54.google.com with SMTP id ro12so576450pbb.27 for <pcp@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 May 2013 05:49:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=references:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:cc:x-mailer:from:subject:date :to; bh=fczObQQbd/MajSdFuUPwwX/W5aeS1bIE+EWv5QsUhnk=; b=aA68gL/8Ne/t9F379RFVM1UqCc3Mq8x0j1J4AYGMDCgzukYc4H9R+y2DOBJY7f1OL4 ioHE97e5EMbzBbY+47uoinXfWP4Tl1TMZ4mtk4lfTGvPPOp89j0OYiBa6CQ2HI5X7yZy nd3XvVOjw4SRpH1weyEuqgEdS7rmxSw3d3Emru4+AwKHWzhWPj6yAQmLX8985qq1bj7t SXMF/Ad+cF25WQh5fLsrynLwjO0XlSVdC6VMFlpgYZmUUlW/43N0ANhj00Pg7aJS1MrE Kw18MaUHak+HZyt3PiketBHEUW97qbW4k8wsmTT9G9HnDhyE3Q9U13Sp3a4igP42x74T jb5g==
X-Received: by 10.66.243.4 with SMTP id wu4mr3076348pac.72.1369140591049; Tue, 21 May 2013 05:49:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.11.9] ([123.120.231.232]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ze11sm3201754pab.22.2013.05.21.05.49.47 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 21 May 2013 05:49:49 -0700 (PDT)
References: <45A697A8FFD7CF48BCF2BE7E106F060409088AD5@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
In-Reply-To: <45A697A8FFD7CF48BCF2BE7E106F060409088AD5@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-B26C25A9-B61D-4235-B50B-85006F3488A6"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <4DC600EC-AB9A-4091-886E-B6F3F3D87157@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (10A8500)
From: "bingxuere@gmail.com" <bingxuere@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 20:49:46 +0800
To: "Reinaldo Penno (repenno)" <repenno@cisco.com>
Cc: "pcp@ietf.org" <pcp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [pcp] Lw4o6 or DS-Lite? (Re: WG Call for Adoption: The Port Control Protocol in Dual-Stack Lite environments)
X-BeenThere: pcp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: PCP wg discussion list <pcp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pcp>, <mailto:pcp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pcp>
List-Post: <mailto:pcp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pcp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcp>, <mailto:pcp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 12:49:58 -0000

Dear Reinaldo,

My intention here is to support DS-Lite as we are also deploying dslite right now and I think this draft is also quite useful.

Best wishes
Qiong

Sent from my iPad

On 2013-5-21, at 16:59, "Reinaldo Penno (repenno)" <repenno@cisco.com> wrote:

> For those supporting this draft, are you thinking (or supporting) DS-Lite or actually Lw4o6?  I would like to make that distinction. 
> 
> Because if you want this draft to work LW4o6 we need to understand changes and implications if any. I know, for example, the PORT SEt draft was originally targeted at Lw4o6, not DS-Lite.
> 
> 
> 
> From: Qiong <bingxuere@gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 16:54:19 +0800
> To: Reinaldo Penno <repenno@cisco.com>
> Cc: "pcp@ietf.org" <pcp@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [pcp] WG Call for Adoption: The Port Control Protocol in Dual-Stack Lite environments
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I support the adoption. 
> 
> This draft is good start, just have one comment:
> I think the encapsulation mode is also very important when AFTR is deployed using anycast address and PCP server is co-located in AFTR. In encapsulation mode, it would be easy to guarantee that the same AFTR will be picked for both PCP traffic and subsequent data traffic. So I prefer to move encapsulation mode in the main body.
> 
> Best wishes
> Qiong
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 7:03 PM, Reinaldo Penno (repenno) <repenno@cisco.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>> 
>> This email starts a 2-week consensus call on adopting
>> 
>>      Title     : The Port Control Protocol in Dual-Stack Lite environments
>>      Author(s) : F. Dupont t al.
>>      URL       : http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dupont-pcp-dslite-05
>> 
>> Please read the current revision and state you opinion either for or
>> against adoption (and with reasoning why) in the mailing list.
>> 
>> The call for adoption ends 24th May 2013.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Reinaldo
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> pcp mailing list
>> pcp@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcp
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> ==============================================
> Qiong Sun
> China Telecom Beijing Research Institude
> 
> 
> Open source code:
> lightweight 4over6: http://sourceforge.net/projects/laft6/
> PCP-natcoord: http://sourceforge.net/projects/pcpportsetdemo/ 
> ===============================================
>