Re: [Softwires] MAP and 4rd - Relationship with Single translation

[Rémi Després <[e-mail]>]

Hi Xing,
Good to have you coming in the (unfinished) technical analysis.

I answered to Ole on his remarks, which you support, but not on the following:

You propose to have a line on "IPv4 to IPv6 communication (single translation) supported", wit 

Let me therefore reiterate the wish to see an ISP use case, with its Mapping rules, and with IPv6 prefixes of CEs that illustrate the problem you see.

Regards,
RD
 




Le 2012-02-10 à 04:28, Xing Li a écrit :
...                                      |     |     |     |     |
>>>   |  5 | IPv6 web caches work for IPv4        |  Y  |  N  |  Y  |  N  |
>>>   |    | packets                              |     |     |     |     |
>> suggest you rename to "IPv4 to IPv6 communication (single translation) supported"
>> 
> 
> (2) More clarification should be added here. I am not sure 4rd-H can support single translation.
> 
> (a) According to (1), 4rd-H does not perform header translation defined by RFC6145. 
> 
> (b) In the softwire mailing list, it seems that 4rd-H cannot support single translation.  See the thread containing http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/softwires/current/msg03324.html and other posts.
> 
> (c) If 4rd-H cannot support single translation, then "IPv6 web caches work for IPv4 packets" requires special configurations, it cannot do IPv6 web caches for non 4rd-H packets.

...

> (5) I would like to see the details of how 4rd-H handles ICMP and ICMP error messages. In the softwire mailing list there were some discussions. See the thread containing http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/softwires/current/msg03324.html and other posts. Please add
> 
>  | 17 | Handle ICMP (RFC6145) | Y | n/a | ? | ? |
...