Re: [Softwires] Updates to lw4o6 Draft (draft-ietf-softwire-lw4over6)
Qi Sun <sunqi.csnet.thu@gmail.com> Thu, 11 July 2013 07:34 UTC
Return-Path: <sunqi.csnet.thu@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 EA84221F9E29 for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 00:34:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 Yk9o6sBewT4Q for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 00:34:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-x22e.google.com (mail-pa0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53BE521F9E28 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 00:34:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pa0-f46.google.com with SMTP id fa11so7621356pad.33 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 00:34:27 -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 :message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=GdsDAtOnA77zOXyIim8eeiJapDIPalphiJv1Dle5OG8=; b=FPOfgvDu604n5bKM6ER2Fv7yKMbVNsJ8lwb3kDVVEV91IVGm6YsGrggr5pqW0QYC+J oEXqJAf4AMX8ob1XYxbNwqikZfB5hkcaUtsnMZjGl2X0KyKBKMSbMjvZ8jrnAZFMEyKH vSIBQiVuu5aYKiMJyRf8p9ZgvZoYQ5O+ZZZr9kPXGaBPnvBeU0boVF1OGADwOPvv90R6 7aQ6j2UOiN7hswAK2pjoDNNPfRebuV2CaQ/qLYR/71LuBQ9blaOpNTaotrgeSZUX4cqe R5xtBVPXS3RZfptRBxaJ48eReTuj+c704Oj9Ph7+MojpeKZ9Hyum6xna3BFduWykHtdo xoAA==
X-Received: by 10.66.150.9 with SMTP id ue9mr33172700pab.88.1373528067006; Thu, 11 Jul 2013 00:34:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.107] ([166.111.68.233]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id qg10sm8461461pbb.2.2013.07.11.00.34.24 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 11 Jul 2013 00:34:26 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-56-83867696"
From: Qi Sun <sunqi.csnet.thu@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CE04216A.7DF5A%ian.farrer@telekom.de>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 15:34:18 +0800
Message-Id: <A090FD78-F670-498F-A31A-32FBC6D68872@gmail.com>
References: <CE04216A.7DF5A%ian.farrer@telekom.de>
To: ian.farrer@telekom.de
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: softwires@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Softwires] Updates to lw4o6 Draft (draft-ietf-softwire-lw4over6)
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, 11 Jul 2013 07:34:28 -0000
Hi Ian , > - I-D.bfmk-softwire-unified-cpe is currently included as a normative reference, this will be moved to informative. Does this mean the Unified CPE will be referenced as an informative one? Best Regards, Qi On 2013-7-11, at 下午2:46, <ian.farrer@telekom.de> <ian.farrer@telekom.de> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm currently updating the lw4o6 draft in advance of IETF87. I plan to include the following changes: > > - I-D.bfmk-softwire-unified-cpe needs to be changed to I-D.ietf-softwire-unified-cpe throughout > > - Section 7 – the reference from I-D.ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-ipv6 should be changed to draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6 in line with the DHC recommendations > > - Section 5.2 does not consider what happens if a packet is received by the lwB4 that isn't addressed to the correct destination v4 address with a valid l4 port (there's a small discussion about this for MAP-E on the list at the moment). Propose that the lw4o6 draft is updated in line with the outcome of this discussions so that MAP-E & lw4o6 CPE behaviour stays aligned. > > - I-D.bfmk-softwire-unified-cpe is currently included as a normative reference, this will be moved to informative. > > - Add text to section 5.2 saying that any IPv4 fragments received by the lwB4 (CPE) after decapsulation are re-assembled before NAT, so that the whole packet can be translated. This is based on some problems encountered during interop testing. > > If you have any comments or objections to the above, please let me know. > > Cheers, > Ian > > _______________________________________________ > Softwires mailing list > Softwires@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires