[Softwires] Tunnel question for DS-Lite
Lizhong Jin <lizho.jin@gmail.com> Mon, 16 June 2014 14:52 UTC
Return-Path: <lizho.jin@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 892E01A0061 for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 07:52:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xaJ6xtrMi0tA for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 07:52:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ig0-x235.google.com (mail-ig0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::235]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3EA9A1A0047 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 07:52:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ig0-f181.google.com with SMTP id h3so3029081igd.2 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 07:52:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=193Cnjva+qrWXY91d6G52Ubd/DM7mNB+sFQ8tsSpFqc=; b=v7WqPpXNwBAkb5V0Tx+2jJjeF0BDLrNU4xgYZpkU3ZdFONvbGyKbC2qs0BBO8ukVS1 n73bPpojPcwGfuu7U03YSayWN89CbDEvvCBoWmnavD2/vD49P3Iq0zuQVjpqnIEEST4Q p6i5dNKYuH5K6sdNQT/weeFU69Mh4wbpe7wqQ7c5UnuO3zva/t0T1MH2NDmv4B+efbMM a+6TBJqNEK32GvgHzANJ2HD48I+RdmX6o8k/6dyByyyoM6BVnJHlpevmwQNeQFJSSc+q tPlm4o/Ou05IRsMaBCfup0TJS583aOmGOusXjErBYcd99+T0tqJDMdOf0F72bYIVrKFR I+LA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.79.232 with SMTP id m8mr25635040igx.33.1402930363718; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 07:52:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.42.107.148 with HTTP; Mon, 16 Jun 2014 07:52:43 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 22:52:43 +0800
Message-ID: <CAH==cJx0uce-izt4J7O6jhwNnbEeO0U6+fHNepj73FCr36cHgg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Lizhong Jin <lizho.jin@gmail.com>
To: softwires@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e013a0606f971a904fbf52d6a"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/softwires/8o79AsdbA8I12BI4PZrbSUQjNyQ
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 07:53:41 -0700
Subject: [Softwires] Tunnel question for DS-Lite
X-BeenThere: softwires@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 14:52:45 -0000
Hi all, DS-Lite RFC6333 defines IPv4-in-IPv6 tunnel as transition tool. But the IPv4-in-IPv6 tunnel will not have good load balance in many legacy network device. Has softwire WG considered to use IPv6 based UDP tunnel to carry the IPv4 traffic? The UDP tunnel will achieve better load balance in the network. Regards Lizhong
- [Softwires] Tunnel question for DS-Lite Lizhong Jin