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

[Wojciech Dec <[e-mail]>]

On 25 June 2012 17:28, Rémi Després <[e-mail]> wrote:

>
> 2012-06-25 à 16:24, Wojciech Dec:
> ...
> > The updated MAP draft does not change the MAP architecture nor its
> technical underpinnings. In fact there are no changes, bar editorial to the
> normative parts of MAP,
>
> Having asked several times for a list of substantial evolutions from
> previous MAP drafts, with their justifications, and having received no
> answer, I see this statement as an indirect but first answer.
>

Woj> You were provided with an answer (pls see Ole's mail).

>
> But it doesn't seem acceptable (*):
> - AFAIK, the added 5th parameter of basic mapping rules is more than
> editorial
>

Woj> Please indicate what the new parameter in your opinion is.

- I didn't find the equivalent of the following sentence in previous
> drafts: "A MAP-E CE provisioned with only a Default Mapping Rule, as in the
> 1:1 case, and with no IPv4 address and port range configured by other
>  means, MUST disable its NAT44 functionality."
>

Woj> Well, perhaps you would like to suggest what the CPE should do in the
case the CPE is issued with a default mapping rule, ie a default route in
map terms, and the absence of an assigned IPv4 address or other parameters
(BMR). The above appears to be reasonable behaviour.

>
> => A carefully studied list of substantial changes MAP supporters have
> found appropriate after the Paris meeting remains to be due.
>

Woj> Take it from the other people who have done implementations,
technically there are no changes.

-Woj.


>
> > something that is proven by existing implementations prior to this draft
> supporting the current draft.
>
> Please understand that your stating that some tests (for which we don't
> have detailed reports) should be considered a proof that what you say is
> true, is difficult to accept.
> Especially if what you say seems contradicted by a verifiable fact (see
> (*) above).
>
> RD
>
>