IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Softwires] Unified proposal for stateless IPv4 Residual Deployments (4rd-U) - Contributors?

"Jan Zorz @ go6.si" <jan@go6.si> Tue, 29 November 2011 19:08 UTC

Return-Path: <jan@go6.si>
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 32E291F0C6E for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 11:08:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 D3TDdTPUyDz0 for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 11:08:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ipv6.go6.si (go6.si [212.44.108.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88FBE21F8B92 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 11:08:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 76.9.wired.gter.nic.br (unknown [200.160.9.76]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: jan) by ipv6.go6.si (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A30B23780AE for <softwires@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 20:08:18 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <4ED52DAC.5000300@go6.si>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 20:08:28 +0100
From: "Jan Zorz @ go6.si" <jan@go6.si>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: softwires@ietf.org
References: <765C1C26-0224-474D-AE80-E15D93EB894B@laposte.net> <1E13F9FB-D07A-4117-ABCC-3B12FC97BF87@employees.org> <C5B5A825-B122-4457-AD48-5C66C9A7A390@laposte.net> <DAA7FDF9-ED2B-48D8-B58B-C167CFE987AB@employees.org>
In-Reply-To: <DAA7FDF9-ED2B-48D8-B58B-C167CFE987AB@employees.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Softwires] Unified proposal for stateless IPv4 Residual Deployments (4rd-U) - Contributors?
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: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 19:08:23 -0000

On 11/29/11 7:47 PM, Ole Troan wrote:
> Remi,
>
> to summarize my view: - the 4rd-u proposal (including the changes you
> plan) are well understood - the main ideas from 4rd-* are already
> incorporated into MAP - 4rd-u is a slightly different way of doing
> translation (calling mapping doesn't change that fact) go to behave
> to argue if yours is better than what was specified there. - I think
> it is the wrong thing for this working group to encourage development
> of yet another solution, when we already have many. - I would also
> like to see one solution, my choice is encapsulation. given that all
> the building blocks already exist, I would expect we'll see
> translation in the wild too, whatever we choose to do in the IETF.
> ref: NAT464.

+1

You nailed it.

Best, Jan Zorz

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email