[Softwires] Hub&spoke supported or not in MAP-E ?

Rémi Després <despres.remi@laposte.net> Wed, 08 February 2012 06:56 UTC

Return-Path: <despres.remi@laposte.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 1A80D21F8725 for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Feb 2012 22:56:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.829
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.829 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.120, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
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 Eqw9mcXsF68O for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Feb 2012 22:56:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp22.services.sfr.fr (smtp22.services.sfr.fr [93.17.128.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BFD221F8721 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Feb 2012 22:56:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from filter.sfr.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by msfrf2216.sfr.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 43BB7700012B; Wed, 8 Feb 2012 07:56:38 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [192.168.0.21] (per92-10-88-166-221-144.fbx.proxad.net [88.166.221.144]) by msfrf2216.sfr.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id ADE2F7000108; Wed, 8 Feb 2012 07:56:37 +0100 (CET)
X-SFR-UUID: 20120208065637712.ADE2F7000108@msfrf2216.sfr.fr
From: Rémi Després <despres.remi@laposte.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2012 07:56:37 +0100
Message-Id: <F2E95911-018E-4FED-B7CA-AEABD3704D0C@laposte.net>
To: Tetsuya Murakami <tetsuya@ipinfusion.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
X-sfr-mailing: LEGIT
Cc: Softwires WG <softwires@ietf.org>
Subject: [Softwires] Hub&spoke supported or not in MAP-E ?
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, 08 Feb 2012 06:56:41 -0000

In the MAP-E draft, I noted that:
- The Introduction says: "CE to CE traffic is direct, while BRs are traversed only for IPv4 packets that are destined to or are arriving from outside a given MAP-E domain."
- Section 5.2 on BR behavior has no provision for hairpinning CE-to-CE packets.
- Section 8.2 is titled "Hub & Spoke model", and says that some CEs may know subsets of Mapping rules, and then send some CE-to-CE packets to "a given BR".

Could you clarify the intent?

Thanks
RD