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

xiaohong deng <dxhbupt@gmail.com> Thu, 06 October 2011 09:08 UTC

Return-Path: <dxhbupt@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 8F22C21F8BE8 for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Oct 2011 02:08:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.327
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.327 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.028, BAYES_00=-2.599, MANGLED_FROM=2.3, 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 qBdlGRnjDgaL for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 6 Oct 2011 02:08:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wy0-f172.google.com (mail-wy0-f172.google.com [74.125.82.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E52C621F8BD8 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Thu, 6 Oct 2011 02:08:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wyh21 with SMTP id 21so2988455wyh.31 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 02:11:41 -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:content-transfer-encoding; bh=2Eb0bsx2RUySbgrMERZTAjXaeZM8Dytb7ArG1yW+N/0=; b=HWuHhA46kAy4xvYcs3rf52AerrGExmfueO7l7YT3VpTPPunNkWDFFMcQZb/fuRTc0E DqYlzlSgUlNrARQB6k8ojSMd6lbsdWLIy0I6duHLwaSFI81CuzGDafqTosctoz9lmckX bpKkYrLbJhLtkh0BM/AHFpf5eCHyD1Kpri57c=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.227.154.66 with SMTP id n2mr725050wbw.3.1317892301402; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 02:11:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.180.104.202 with HTTP; Thu, 6 Oct 2011 02:11:41 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABv173VUCzOoKzQtNhKMSs1a2xyFAfHpGvhUX-iS2RcEt3Y43w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANb4Oc=QqdxCJVj+LNaOimZPT_mPPa-MQmwZaBM=92_QVrFiWA@mail.gmail.com> <67E4A8C5-B119-45DB-8367-BDF55A380DC4@laposte.net> <CABv173VUCzOoKzQtNhKMSs1a2xyFAfHpGvhUX-iS2RcEt3Y43w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 17:11:41 +0800
Message-ID: <CANb4Ock-4nFsw0JmoCff-4X1dz1qAdEjYzc7eGW4PPz7NNPu+g@mail.gmail.com>
From: xiaohong deng <dxhbupt@gmail.com>
To: Congxiao Bao <cx.cernet@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Softwires-wg <softwires@ietf.org>, Congxiao Bao <congxiao@cernet.edu.cn>
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: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 09:08:32 -0000

On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 11:37 PM, Congxiao Bao <cx.cernet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Remi,
>
> Ok, we will draft a document on using existing tools for O&M in dIVI/dIVI-PD
> very soon.

Thanks for sharing and look forward to it.

Cheers,
Xiaohong

>
> Best,
>
> Congxiao
>
> 2011/10/4 Rémi Després <despres.remi@laposte.net>
>>
>> Hi Xing, Congxiao,
>>
>> Le 4 oct. 2011 à 15:26, xiaohong deng a écrit :
>> ...
>> > It IMHO would be helpful if anybody would clarify some details to 1)
>> > first prove source based classification is either a valid or a
>> > non-valid requirement for address mapping; For this regard, I would
>> > begin with that why do we think the source based IPv4 classification
>> > ability instead of the more general five-tuple based IPv4
>> > classification ability should be reserved, when deliver IPv4 over
>> > IPv6?
>>
>> What about starting from your conclusion slide in Beijing?
>>
>> It says:
>>
>> "dIVI/dIVI-PD can use existing tools for O&M
>> – Null route
>> – ACL
>> – eACL
>> – PBR
>> – QoS
>> – Caching"
>>
>> Open questions include:
>> - Which addresses are used for these O&M functions? (source? destination?,
>> CE to CE?, CE to BR?, BR to CE?)
>> - Are ports within IPv6 payloads used, or just addresses?
>>
>> Thank you if you can share your views on this.
>>
>> Regards,
>> RD
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Softwires mailing list
>> Softwires@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
>
>