IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Softwires] 4rd mapping rule separation

Rémi Després <despres.remi@laposte.net> Sat, 20 August 2011 07:19 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 2547921F8B27 for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 00:19:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.879
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.879 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.069, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 Gj9c5eXvq0kc for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 00:19:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp23.services.sfr.fr (smtp23.services.sfr.fr [93.17.128.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DD1121F8B25 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 00:19:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from filter.sfr.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by msfrf2314.sfr.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id E43627006A67; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 09:20:05 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.0.21] (per92-10-88-166-221-144.fbx.proxad.net [88.166.221.144]) by msfrf2314.sfr.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id AF95F700210D; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 09:20:05 +0200 (CEST)
X-SFR-UUID: 20110820072005719.AF95F700210D@msfrf2314.sfr.fr
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-41-510156293"
From: Rémi Després <despres.remi@laposte.net>
In-Reply-To: <B9B8EA94-0D7D-4E59-9C82-41C9C1802555@townsley.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2011 09:20:05 +0200
Message-Id: <A267CC61-CB9D-493A-9492-5832C7F2E952@laposte.net>
References: <13AEF630-13AC-467C-884C-7F26A1A23284@laposte.net> <210E3894-0407-4964-B056-89DC3B502891@gmail.com> <8589DBE2-73F7-47FA-ABBB-4517061F2A11@laposte.net> <CAFwJXX6Cjm_gxPTsTKXR_T24x+RiEn=HcD3btE8zc5pXqPPuWg@mail.gmail.com> <DFBD920D-2E18-4B6E-AFB2-6887CB70801D@laposte.net> <103C6AB4-B9DB-4E0A-8799-D9F601B682F1@townsley.net> <77A38FA6-24D2-4676-98B9-134B4A096A9B@laposte.net> <4E4EF9FC.8020407@skoberne.net> <B9B8EA94-0D7D-4E59-9C82-41C9C1802555@townsley.net>
To: Mark Townsley <mark@townsley.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: softwires@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Softwires] 4rd mapping rule separation
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: Sat, 20 Aug 2011 07:19:08 -0000

Le 20 août 2011 à 03:55, Mark Townsley a écrit :

> 
> On Aug 19, 2011, at 8:04 PM, Nejc Škoberne wrote:
> 
>>> Because of what RFC6333 says, suggesting NOW that solutions that don't need NATs are variants of DS-lite is a sure way to confuse people.
> 
> Then we're already confused:
> 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-boucadair-softwire-cgn-bypass-03

Could you explain more which confusion you are referring to?

RD

v2.41.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status