IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Softwires] 4rd Address Mapping - version-01

Maoke <fibrib@gmail.com> Wed, 19 October 2011 05:50 UTC

Return-Path: <fibrib@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 9D4B611E8087 for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 22:50:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.306
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.306 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.292, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 S49fzjT+7J6v for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 22:50:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qy0-f179.google.com (mail-qy0-f179.google.com [209.85.216.179]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D2B911E8080 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 22:50:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qyk31 with SMTP id 31so1155680qyk.10 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 22:50:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=jdA2J6JlywKBtCVdBayidfVTK1wAHUPWYutHNL+mELs=; b=fInCikrd0wCBYVzUhF/kRL9LFt75OKUGmeoy6HJBSFrO4FcUl+VZbugLjkO6yDyxnz lkVdOHtEuDwgOF0tNzlOhS2UmubqLHsnGjhMBeIU+Qboux5Fi9CMYc/saZhwu39ncBLa CPS6OZUTrKjwKPZa59hLiM+Ef08aIVAPEIlxQ=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.229.67.149 with SMTP id r21mr1145121qci.183.1319003431782; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 22:50:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.229.175.205 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Oct 2011 22:50:31 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4E9E41C5.502@jacni.com>
References: <D8334AA7-5001-4A92-B977-CE32931F4197@laposte.net> <CAAuHL_Cm6WYiM2Cu-fmu=gBLgTYDZ6hr56BfcXMoeS=Af4Q_jw@mail.gmail.com> <CAFUBMqUvrP-s1yrJ0=ToAA_SvRLWQtq7JCTtpASNiS1GAxdSNQ@mail.gmail.com> <4E9B9BC5.2090200@jacni.com> <CAFUBMqUS1cATWr07Os4d6aLUbNaVwuOCcthObOiMPuDv8VfU1g@mail.gmail.com> <4E9BE001.3060202@jacni.com> <6CADC58598A4D249AD3B5026CE8CC33906D75AC8@CI-EXMB-09V.bb.local> <CAFUBMqW7xqxwzToxn1=0y4q48Dr5U8rx3pDoavcWGhPyO-OLpw@mail.gmail.com> <4E9CEA60.6040208@jacni.com> <CAFUBMqXS9tJvs9Oz+NQczUkQvikEuyzRnX_iR4QE1_=tJA7OCA@mail.gmail.com> <4E9E2987.6070407@jacni.com> <CAFUBMqUp8dzW0AR96J9LYPKU4-zWnbQ6hjFgNUNKdFPxPQ=WxA@mail.gmail.com> <4E9E41C5.502@jacni.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 14:50:31 +0900
Message-ID: <CAFUBMqUHG2PdBa1mfyja=LM9eVKu=LMfgxvGzsMoeyFB8Au+YQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Maoke <fibrib@gmail.com>
To: Jacni Qin <jacni@jacni.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00163628429e024a6304afa06b2c"
Cc: softwires@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Softwires] 4rd Address Mapping - version-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: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 05:50:33 -0000

hi,

2011/10/19 Jacni Qin <jacni@jacni.com>

>
>  a single value over the domain or possible variable among different
> shared IPv4 addresses? (to my understanding, one address should have a
> common value of PSID length for all the CEs sharing the address, right?)
>
> The number of L equals the number of Delegated Prefixes of different
> lengths totally within a given domain, which should be determined during
> IPv6 address planning.
>
>
they are equal to each other. but which determines which, in or before the
IPv6 address planning? delegated prefix length decides PSID length (sharing
ratio), or inversely? is it not that the sharing ratio is determined by how
many CEs sharing a unique IPv4 address?

best,
maoke


> Cheers,
> Jacni
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email