IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Softwires] WG last call on draft-ietf-softwire-stateless-4v6-motivation-01

<mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> Mon, 11 June 2012 15:37 UTC

Return-Path: <mohamed.boucadair@orange.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 3EF3621F85CC for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 08:37:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.248
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.248 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001]
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 BOA5bbnTjmEB for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 08:37:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relais-inet.francetelecom.com (relais-ias92.francetelecom.com [193.251.215.92]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 823BB21F855E for <softwires@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 08:37:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from omfedm07.si.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.3]) by omfedm14.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 3B70F22C3E4; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 17:37:20 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from PUEXCH51.nanterre.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.101.44.31]) by omfedm07.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 112F14C07C; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 17:37:20 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr ([10.101.44.9]) by PUEXCH51.nanterre.francetelecom.fr ([10.101.44.31]) with mapi; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 17:37:20 +0200
From: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
To: "Lee, Yiu" <Yiu_Lee@Cable.Comcast.com>, liu dapeng <maxpassion@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 17:37:18 +0200
Thread-Topic: [Softwires] WG last call on draft-ietf-softwire-stateless-4v6-motivation-01
Thread-Index: AQHNR+IN9ZxdlDBC80OY3bEwshPkJJb1QE7g
Message-ID: <94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F36E331FEBF5@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr>
References: <94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F36E331FE64D@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr> <CBFB7C93.21D2B%yiu_lee@cable.comcast.com>
In-Reply-To: <CBFB7C93.21D2B%yiu_lee@cable.comcast.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: fr-FR
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-PMX-Version: 5.6.1.2065439, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.376379, Antispam-Data: 2012.6.11.141516
Cc: "softwires@ietf.org" <softwires@ietf.org>, Yong Cui <cuiyong@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Softwires] WG last call on draft-ietf-softwire-stateless-4v6-motivation-01
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: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 15:37:22 -0000

Hi Yiu,

Works for me. Thanks.

Cheers,
Med 

>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : Lee, Yiu [mailto:Yiu_Lee@Cable.Comcast.com] 
>Envoyé : lundi 11 juin 2012 16:54
>À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/NAD/TIP; liu dapeng
>Cc : softwires@ietf.org; Yong Cui
>Objet : Re: [Softwires] WG last call on 
>draft-ietf-softwire-stateless-4v6-motivation-01
>
>Hi Med and Dapeng,
>
>In order to close the gap, I suggest a slight modification:
>
>"Current standardization effort that is meant to address this IPv4
>   service continuity issue focuses mainly on stateful mechanisms that
>sharing of global IPv4 addresses between
>Customers is based upon the deployment of NAT (Network Address
>   Translation) capabilities in the network.  Because of some 
>caveats of
>   such stateful approaches the Service Provider community feels that a
>   companion effort is required to specify stateless IPv4 over IPv6
>   approaches.  Note that the stateless solution elaborated in this
>document
>focuses on the carrier-side stateless IPv4 over IPv6 solution. 
>States may
>still exist in other equipments such as customer-premises equipment."
>
>Thanks,
>Yiu
>
>
>On 6/8/12 8:12 AM, "mohamed.boucadair@orange.com"
><mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> wrote:
>
>>Med: Thanks for the proposal. I shortened your proposal and 
>updated the
>>text to:
>>
>>
>>   Current standardization effort that is meant to address this IPv4
>>   service continuity issue focuses mainly on stateful mechanisms that
>>   assume the sharing of any global IPv4 address that is left between
>>   several customers, based upon the deployment of NAT 
>(Network Address
>>   Translation) capabilities in the network.  Because of some 
>caveats of
>>   such stateful approaches the Service Provider community 
>feels that a
>>   companion effort is required to specify stateless IPv4 over IPv6
>>   approaches.  Note stateless IPv4 over IPv6 solutions may be enabled
>>   in conjunction with a port-restricted NAT44 function located in the
>>   customer premises.
>>
>>   This document provides elaboration on the need for carrier-side
>>   stateless IPv4 over IPv6 solution.
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email