IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Softwires] review of draft-operators-softwire-stateless-4v6-motivation-02.txt

Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Wed, 27 July 2011 12:09 UTC

Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
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 BD36D21F8B3C for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 05:09:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.291
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.291 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.008, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BUziZOf7IjkC for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 05:09:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3462021F8B66 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 05:09:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF8012CEFF; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 15:09:01 +0300 (EEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net
Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9HEPO9vcRWTN; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 15:09:01 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5501A2CC4B; Wed, 27 Jul 2011 15:09:00 +0300 (EEST)
Message-ID: <4E2FFFDB.3000301@piuha.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 08:08:59 -0400
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20101027)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rémi Després <remi.despres@free.fr>
References: <CA54E358.12A82%yiu_lee@cable.comcast.com> <E150407B-2F50-4034-8B6C-846EC63BE309@free.fr>
In-Reply-To: <E150407B-2F50-4034-8B6C-846EC63BE309@free.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: Softwires-wg <softwires@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Softwires] review of draft-operators-softwire-stateless-4v6-motivation-02.txt
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 Jul 2011 12:09:09 -0000

Rémi,
>> I want to eacho Satoru's comment that this draft wasn't intended to
>> compare stateless and stateful transition mechanisms. This draft only
>> describes the motivations.
>>     

And I don't want a full blown comparison either, but if the argument is 
that we need to do this because is better/cheaper/more efficient than 
something else, I think we do need to explain the main differences to 
that something else (positive and negative).

Jari

P.S. I hope you'll have a productive discussion about this today, but 
unfortunately I'm presenting in another working group so I can't be at 
the SOFTWIRE meeting.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email