IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Softwires] [Softwire] draft-ietf-softwire-map-00 does NOT reflect the consensus from the WG

Satoru Matsushima <satoru.matsushima@gmail.com> Wed, 27 June 2012 09:32 UTC

Return-Path: <satoru.matsushima@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E63521F85F3 for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Jun 2012 02:32:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.449
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 w1zXpJy4TqHM for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Jun 2012 02:32:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pz0-f44.google.com (mail-pz0-f44.google.com [209.85.210.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B40A21F85F1 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Jun 2012 02:32:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by dacx6 with SMTP id x6so1161470dac.31 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Jun 2012 02:32:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=YEwL75tA8Cd8FvBetYQggAgEuz4WmdhcycYdF1xDKRM=; b=BbVyeIbPyEZUtJe08MwY34YwTRg36mF+cNtjcl9t9lwesuRFnOZsIPsCAteWGEway0 uWEB1UVVPizTCFfeFh4GBGOmW3U0tGibKG5xjlU3nz0YVjY6LBC0qIPookt4ANdF77qD FuGNNcbkMpEeN84JHSmbOSs4jNAoh6Gsl4zU2C2+t+/5T9mpx9zng+z3fWDbWL+ONSX4 AjRawiTVbrjp0Y6693dMTS2IxpSc0c04XWfO/fI7Vl1qJpl4VSUuJPn9Vf5BxC3pgUZo JlUdlsUtv/GpGP2b+1zuYVFx1sDVbpz4U7HW2cLD9ot6HO7WAiX679DYylLqhyolGIcD gB4Q==
Received: by 10.68.238.68 with SMTP id vi4mr40638626pbc.123.1340789545890; Wed, 27 Jun 2012 02:32:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.201.81.61] ([202.45.12.141]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id nh8sm14645730pbc.60.2012.06.27.02.32.22 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 27 Jun 2012 02:32:24 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1278)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Satoru Matsushima <satoru.matsushima@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAtO+Xn-HJNh=h8299MhNAKNGwZDzVzTwy29+FKujHt6wp=pwA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 18:32:19 +0900
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <C6D684E4-16B4-4B6D-8B72-4A5F8615EBA3@gmail.com>
References: <CC0F2D82.285F4%ian.farrer@telekom.de> <CAFFjW4ireDBzacCFDYgh3kn3+MXx1=m3Kab6Wp7TFwnHeyfwDw@mail.gmail.com> <CAH3bfADW1LN5nr1trd+Hu0tu4R3cHNEcx5yppN4p4Rh1bHaq1w@mail.gmail.com> <04DCBF0D-2B31-42E8-A363-22656FBAF447@gmail.com> <CAFUBMqURHk_AJfaTmx0vVJVuVFL0QaKZp15p=fZXX+Ftpf50cg@mail.gmail.com> <C41CE132-8C42-4898-B2DF-43BBFAE89515@gmail.com> <CAC16W0Ds-aRLMbyVdwifA3wjJwHuKOKjhkDLxxRm+X68wOnv7A@mail.gmail.com> <CBD94C41-5A67-4DDC-BDE4-514C7F186E8B@gmail.com> <CAC16W0CUWhwLD8NFGxsCHWGUtRatpSUvOfFAerriUbtuQLezcA@mail.gmail.com> <1E6988FF-BFE6-4DA4-A7F6-B8BC4205967F@gmail.com> <CAAtO+XmHYvSOwxOShiNfEgXhOMGvKhPce2vvTWXa=+i+47GeSg@mail.gmail.com> <B725FD4A-35D6-46BE-A32A-87C3E4C3F958@gmail.com> <CAAtO+Xn-HJNh=h8299MhNAKNGwZDzVzTwy29+FKujHt6wp=pwA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Qi Sun <sunqi.csnet.thu@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278)
Cc: Softwires WG <softwires@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Softwires] [Softwire] draft-ietf-softwire-map-00 does NOT reflect the consensus from the WG
X-BeenThere: softwires@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: softwires wg discussion list <softwires.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/softwires>
List-Post: <mailto:softwires@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 09:32:26 -0000

On 2012/06/27, at 18:20, Qi Sun wrote:

> Hi Satoru,
> 
> Please see inline.
> 
> BTW, my name is Qi :)
> 

Agh! I'm so sorry!

> 
> [Qi]  What we are discussing is on the essence of MAP where 1:1 mode is intended to import binding table on BR , and on whether the ietf-map-00 is qualified as a WG draft without consensus of the softwire WG. Rather than the provisioning methods, saying DHCPv4 over IPv6 or DHCPv6 options.
> 

Ah, ok.

> >  All those mechanisms like DHCPv4 over IPv6 or PCP are not the essence of the protocol but provisioning method for LW4over6.
> > Actually, based on what you have said, I can get that the "new" MAP can achieve its NEW added 1:1 mode with the help of DHCPv4 over IPv6 for IPv4 address allocation. Why don't you use it, which has been a DHC WG draft?
> >
> 
> These are not possible because they require state in BR so that it's LW46 use case, right? MAP define mapping rule in stateless manner.
> 
> [Qi] As a provisioning method, DHCPv4 over IPv6 DOES NOT require any state in TC/BR. Please check the draft. As a result, this is not about stateful or stateless. There is no conflict between the binding table on BR and the DHCPv4 over IPv6 process.

If it is true, LW46 should be a stateless solution.

cheers,
--satoru

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email