IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Softwires] sharing restricted addresses by hosts in 4rd (draft-despres-intarea-4rd-01)

"Lee, Yiu" <Yiu_Lee@Cable.Comcast.com> Wed, 20 April 2011 19:13 UTC

Return-Path: <yiu_lee@cable.comcast.com>
X-Original-To: softwires@ietfc.amsl.com
Delivered-To: softwires@ietfc.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DC89E06F4 for <softwires@ietfc.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Apr 2011 12:13:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -99.985
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.985 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.750, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HB941WOlpjKy for <softwires@ietfc.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Apr 2011 12:13:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cable.comcast.com (copdcimo01.potomac.co.ndcwest.comcast.net [76.96.32.251]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9D83E06D9 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Apr 2011 12:13:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([24.40.55.41]) by copdcimo01.cable.comcast.com with ESMTP with TLS id 5503630.34889174; Wed, 20 Apr 2011 13:17:10 -0600
Received: from PACDCEXMB05.cable.comcast.com ([fe80::a5b0:e5c4:df1b:2367]) by PACDCEXHUB02.cable.comcast.com ([fe80::11d4:f530:37a0:9f4e%12]) with mapi id 14.01.0289.001; Wed, 20 Apr 2011 15:13:46 -0400
From: "Lee, Yiu" <Yiu_Lee@Cable.Comcast.com>
To: Mark Townsley <mark@townsley.net>, Alain Durand <adurand@juniper.net>
Thread-Topic: [Softwires] sharing restricted addresses by hosts in 4rd (draft-despres-intarea-4rd-01)
Thread-Index: AQHL/48RFG4fwT8PBkCPWWJjcLnnYQ==
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 19:13:44 +0000
Message-ID: <C9D4A591.D076%yiu_lee@cable.comcast.com>
In-Reply-To: <EC856C85-5329-4DD8-9788-3628E57E5F89@townsley.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.0.101115
x-originating-ip: [68.82.28.202]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <4320EF4BD83FFD4FA6E12D80AC11F601@cable.comcast.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "softwires@ietf.org" <softwires@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Softwires] sharing restricted addresses by hosts in 4rd (draft-despres-intarea-4rd-01)
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, 20 Apr 2011 19:13:51 -0000

I agree that any p2p application using relay would work on 4rd.

For two 4rds using the same v4 address but different port-ranges, I guess
the two 4rd devices would communicate directly w/o BR (Section 4.5.1)
because 4rd CPE has mesh connectivity (over IPv6) to all other 4rds using
the same 4rd prefix.

/Yiu

On 4/20/11 2:17 PM, "Mark Townsley" <mark@townsley.net> wrote:

>For IPv4, in the model I describe above, all applications are sitting
>behind the NAPT within the CPE bound to the 4rd tunnel. End-to-end looks
>just about as desperate and ugly as it does today between any series of
>NAPTs and firewalls. Skype will make its way through, I suspect with no
>modifications.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email