IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Softwires] [Softwire] draft-ietf-softwire-map-00 does NOT reflect the consensus from the WG

Satoru Matsushima <satoru.matsushima@gmail.com> Mon, 25 June 2012 03:47 UTC

Return-Path: <satoru.matsushima@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 1CF9521F859F for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Jun 2012 20:47:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.499, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 3bRGTk3mO3LO for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Jun 2012 20:47:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pb0-f44.google.com (mail-pb0-f44.google.com [209.85.160.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92FDF21F856F for <softwires@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Jun 2012 20:47:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pbcwy7 with SMTP id wy7so6006673pbc.31 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Jun 2012 20:47:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=B/Jvx1NOj9iAkJXkCAgLjKTnIm0x4PaM0ND0iA9oibI=; b=hKNCER/025C24eyMeHzdRMOBT8P/PRnLFm5yovbeI5gcGW6RyQ+dCcGGnJUBuU3j8U bgnJSd9//8ZhtvjCTKIgQlSCLl1TrbfIz3CV+GPwV7l0iCEOgQkHYeqfrn0rtTWaBkg+ Rb28jSJNzhkHerLtFkNCOMr5CGaZ35YII3xBwDGtZdblz7dp5AlSZrVUaq0zdG7/Sp8s 1tBSFaZS+w0uTiqvEsGAGhyCgMko5bV3iB3pi1+QkUtGcZhB/V0NGfDmx5xLrjuiJUT3 jrK0VBZosgK/VRLU6Wbar/ekDValqvZvKuJIaqRYB593C+8kcO5F+7tT+InByNn6N2KE 6JDg==
Received: by 10.68.194.105 with SMTP id hv9mr27203683pbc.126.1340596058450; Sun, 24 Jun 2012 20:47:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.201.81.61] ([202.45.12.141]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id rd7sm7148972pbc.70.2012.06.24.20.47.36 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 24 Jun 2012 20:47:37 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1278)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Satoru Matsushima <satoru.matsushima@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CC0D5573.226E9%yiu_lee@cable.comcast.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 12:47:34 +0900
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <C98BB323-9676-411B-9AC8-D930412F9AD4@gmail.com>
References: <CC0D5573.226E9%yiu_lee@cable.comcast.com>
To: "Lee, Yiu" <Yiu_Lee@Cable.Comcast.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278)
Cc: "softwires@ietf.org" <softwires@ietf.org>, Yong Cui <cuiyong@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Softwires] [Softwire] draft-ietf-softwire-map-00 does NOT reflect the consensus from the WG
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: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 03:47:39 -0000

Hi Yiu,

On 2012/06/25, at 12:40, Lee, Yiu wrote:

> Dear Satoru,
> 
> I do not understand how to create "per-subscriber mapping" in a stateless
> manner. In the end, the BR must contain all mapping rules for all 1:1
> subscribers. This is stateful to my understanding. Could you please
> explain how not to maintain any mapping rule in BR to achieve this?

This could be same operation with any other, configure FMRs into a map tunnel.
Nothing changed.

cheers,
--satoru

> 
> Thanks and regards,
> Yiu
> 
> 
> On 6/24/12 10:27 PM, "Satoru Matsushima" <satoru.matsushima@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> No, that's a misunderstanding.
>> Current MAP specify the case for ea-len is 'zero'. It is 'per-subscriber
>> mapping' in stateless manner, not to introduce 'per-flow NAT binding' or
>> 'per-subscriber state on demand'.
>>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email