IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Softwires] Keeping support of CE IPv4 prefixes in the v4/v6 address mapping?

<mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> Thu, 03 November 2011 09:14 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 083A711E810F for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 02:14:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.967
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.967 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.019, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, 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 spK8VqR3nPG7 for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 02:14:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relais-inet.francetelecom.com (relais-ias92.francetelecom.com [193.251.215.92]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31E7D11E808B for <softwires@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 02:14:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from omfedm08.si.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.4]) by omfedm09.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 829942DC3D2; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 10:14:04 +0100 (CET)
Received: from PUEXCH61.nanterre.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.101.44.32]) by omfedm08.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 571B5238059; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 10:14:04 +0100 (CET)
Received: from PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr ([10.101.44.14]) by PUEXCH61.nanterre.francetelecom.fr ([10.101.44.32]) with mapi; Thu, 3 Nov 2011 10:14:04 +0100
From: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
To: Rémi Després <despres.remi@laposte.net>, Jacni Qin <jacni@jacni.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 10:14:03 +0100
Thread-Topic: Keeping support of CE IPv4 prefixes in the v4/v6 address mapping?
Thread-Index: AcyaB54LWeU8nU9rRliwL8Qf1qsApAAARdhA
Message-ID: <94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F35A37B99455@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr>
References: <7017F405-CBEC-4D7D-94ED-56FF2B774C0C@laposte.net> <37EE7524-2AF1-4286-A80D-004E7958C5A0@gmail.com> <FCFFF724-847B-45D3-B6A5-1F937356F6B6@laposte.net> <94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F35A37B98DA7@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr> <BA1F9EBE-CDFE-47DB-BE40-08033E62AF17@cisco.com> <94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F35A37B98E17@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr> <88E22674-98FF-4F21-ADA4-4F3E77A6401D@laposte.net> <94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F35A37B98E3B@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr> <E296AD82-0AC6-460E-AB95-6AC6B8127008@cisco.com> <5225339E-1B72-456D-A0E7-2C96F2051EA3@juniper.net> <4EB214D3.7050900@jacni.com> <71723B71-64FD-4EE4-9E21-DE5D57E2FA60@laposte.net> <4EB255CC.30602@jacni.com> <CDFCECE5-A6F3-4C21-81D6-272C9F360E92@laposte.net>
In-Reply-To: <CDFCECE5-A6F3-4C21-81D6-272C9F360E92@laposte.net>
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: 5.5.9.395186, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.376379, Antispam-Data: 2011.3.31.105417
Cc: Softwires WG <softwires@ietf.org>, Ole Troan <ot@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [Softwires] Keeping support of CE IPv4 prefixes in the v4/v6 address mapping?
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: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 09:14:12 -0000

Hi Rémi, all,

Since there is only an excerpt of e-mails, I lost the context. 

Could you please clarify what is the issue discussed here? Thanks.

Cheers,
Med

 

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Rémi Després [mailto:despres.remi@laposte.net] 
> Envoyé : jeudi 3 novembre 2011 10:05
> À : Jacni Qin
> Cc : Alain Durand; Ole Troan; BOUCADAIR Mohamed OLNC/NAD/TIP; 
> Satoru Matsushima; Softwires WG
> Objet : Keeping support of CE IPv4 prefixes in the v4/v6 
> address mapping?
> 
> 
> Le 3 nov. 2011 à 09:50, Jacni Qin a écrit :
> >>> if the MAP just covers "shared address with one single 
> sharing ratio for one domain",
> >>> the design will be greatly simplified?
> >> Requiring ISPs to maintain IPv4 routing in their networks, 
> just to serve the few users that need to keep IPv4 prefixes, 
> seems to me a step backward.
> >> 
> >> Besides, I have serious doubts about "greatly simplified".
> > I mean for the design of the address/port mapping 
> algorithm, not the transport mechanism.
> 
> Yes, but I don't see the great simplification of the algorithm.
> Keeping it general enough to support IPv4 prefixes is AFAIK 
> easy. It doesn't prevent deployments where, IPv4 prefixes 
> being not supported, fields can be at places that may be 
> found more convenient.
> 
> Maybe you can be more specific on your concern.
> 
> Cheers,
> RD
> 
>

v2.27.8 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status